Title

Project CE1: Trincity Estate Project

Course Code & Title

CVNG3014/20
CIVIL ENGINEERING DESIGN PROJECT

Prepared By: Group

Student ID Name

816015674 Veer Bachan

816015708 Sarah Mohammed

816009406 Daniel Stewart

816014498 Crisanne Davis-Rostant

Date Submitted: 02/02/2021

1
 GROUP PLAGIARISM DECLARATION

COURSE TITLE: Civil Engineering Design Project

COURSE CODE: CVNG 3014/20

TITLE OF ASSIGNMENT: Project CE1: Trincity Estate Project

When submitting a group assignment for assessment each member of the group will be required to sign the
following declaration of ownership which will appear on the coursework submission sheet.

We the undersigned declare that:

1. We have read the Plagiarism Regulations as set out in the Faculty or Open Campus Student Handbook
and on University websites related to the submission of coursework for assessment.

2. We declare that I understand that plagiarism is a serious academic offence for which the University
may impose severe penalties.

3. The submitted work indicated above is our own work, except where duly acknowledged and referenced.

This work has not been previously submitted for credit either in its entirety or in part within the UWI or
elsewhere. Where work was previously submitted, permission has been granted by our
SupervisorƒLecturerƒInstructor as reflected by the attached Accountability Statement.

We understand that we may be required to submit the work In electronic form and accept that the
University may check the originality of the work using a computer−based similarity detention service.

NAME

SIGNATURE _

NAME

SIGNATURE _

NAME

_ SIGNATURE _
DATE
__________________________________________________________________________
___________

2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
TABLE OF CONTENTS
COURSE TITLE: ........................................................................................................................... 2

1.0 Executive Summary ........................................................................................................... 18

2.0 Introduction ........................................................................................................................ 19

2.1 Scope .............................................................................................................................. 19

2.2 Objectives ....................................................................................................................... 20

2.3 Project Overview ............................................................................................................ 20

2.4 Project References .......................................................................................................... 21

3.0 Feasibility Analysis ............................................................................................................ 22

3.1 Project Description ......................................................................................................... 22

3.2 Preliminary Study........................................................................................................... 24

3.2.1 Topography.............................................................................................................. 24

3.2.2 Climate..................................................................................................................... 25

3.2.3 Hydrology ................................................................................................................ 26

3.2.4 Geology and Soils .................................................................................................... 28

3.2.5 Public Services and Utilities .................................................................................... 30

3.2.6 Vegetation ................................................................................................................ 30

3.2.7 External Area and Social Conditions....................................................................... 32

3.3 Preliminary Environmental Impact Assessment ............................................................ 32

3.4 Preliminary Design Concept .......................................................................................... 43

3.5 Economic Analysis ......................................................................................................... 46

3.5.1 Water, Storm Water and Waste Water Management .............................................. 46

3.5.2 Pavement Management............................................................................................ 49

3.5.3 Structural Systems ................................................................................................... 50

11
 3.6 Sustainability .................................................................................................................. 52

4.0 Evaluation of Alternatives ................................................................................................. 54

4.1 Site Location .................................................................................................................. 54

4.2 Layout Alternatives: ....................................................................................................... 59

5.0 Proposed Design (Preliminary Engineering Design, Materials and Drawings) ................ 63

4.1 Water, Storm Water and Waste Water Management ..................................................... 63

5.1.1 Corrugated HDPE Pipe ............................................................................................ 63

5.1.2 Concrete sewers ....................................................................................................... 64

5.1.3 Multiple Criteria Analysis ....................................................................................... 71

5.1.4 Detention Basin ....................................................................................................... 74

5.1.5 Surface Runoff ......................................................................................................... 77

5.1.6 Wastewater Treatment and Layout .......................................................................... 85

5.1.7 Existing Hydrography.............................................................................................. 86

5.2 Pavement Management .................................................................................................. 88

5.2.1 Flexible Pavements .................................................................................................. 88

5.2.2 Rigid Pavements ...................................................................................................... 89

5.2.3 Flexible vs Rigid Pavements ................................................................................... 90

5.3 Structural Systems ........................................................................................................ 100

6.0 Health and Safety ............................................................................................................. 253

7.0 Conclusion ....................................................................................................................... 254

8.0 References ........................................................................................................................ 256

12
TABLE OF FIGURES

Figure 1: Google Map of Trinidad showing the area of the proposed development ............... 22

Figure 2: Map of Trincity showing the proposed site .............................................................. 23

Figure 3: Contour map of Trincity showing the area of the proposed development .............. 24

Figure 4:Showing probability of rainfall and intensity for first dekad of February 2021. (TTMS

2021) ........................................................................................................................................ 25

Figure 5:Showing proposed site proximity to Arouca river (East) .......................................... 26

Figure 6:Catchment of Arouca River(red) ............................................................................... 27

Figure 7:Longest river from catchment.(Light Blue) .............................................................. 27

Figure 8: Showing Clay-Loam of the Trincity Area ................................................................ 28

Figure 9:Showing Geological map of Trinidad. (KUGLER 1961) ......................................... 29

Figure 10: The Forest Association and Land Cover for Trinidad ............................................ 31

Figure 11: Showing preliminary Layout 1 ............................................................................... 44

Figure 12: Showing preliminary layout 2 ................................................................................ 45

Figure 13: Showing alternative site locations in the Trincity Area ......................................... 54

Figure 14: Showing corrugated HDPE pipelines being installed ............................................ 64

Figure 15: Showing concrete stormwater drainage being constructed. ................................... 65

Figure 16: Showing graph of hydrographs predevelopment and post development. .............. 76

Figure 17: Showing dimensions of detention basin. ................................................................ 77

Figure 18: Showing Kerbs on sidewalks for wastewater collection ........................................ 79

Figure 19: Showing detail of stormwater collection system .................................................... 79

Figure 20: Showing front view of slipper gate for keeping debris out stormwater system ..... 80

Figure 21: Showing Drainage Pattern of North side of Site .................................................... 81

Figure 22: Showing Drainage pattern of South side of site ..................................................... 82

Figure 23: Showing kerbs along roadways (red) of the site .................................................... 83

13
Figure 24: Showing Stormwater Sewer (yellow) and respective nodes for each sub catchment

.................................................................................................................................................. 84

Figure 25: Showing critical section of Arouca River near the proposed Site. ......................... 86

Figure 26: Showing Hyetograph for catchment flowing into Arouca River near proposed site.

.................................................................................................................................................. 87

Figure 27: Typical cross section of a flexible pavement (Mathew 2009) ................................ 89

Figure 28: Typical cross section of a flexible pavement (Mathew 2009) ................................ 89

Figure 29: Load Distribution for Rigid and Flexible Pavements (Anderson) ......................... 91

Figure 30: Recommended Level of Reliability (Classifications from AASHTO 1993) ......... 94

Figure 31: Showing Nomograph used in pavement calculations ............................................ 99

Figure 32: Layout of Single Bedroom Apartment ................................................................. 171

Figure 33: Front Elevation of Single Bedroom Apartment ................................................... 171

Figure 34: Layout of 2 Bedroom Apartment ......................................................................... 172

Figure 35: Front Elevation of 2 Bedroom Apartment ............................................................ 172

Figure 36: Layout of Small House ......................................................................................... 173

Figure 37: Elevation of small house ...................................................................................... 174

Figure 38: Layout of Large House Ground Floor .................................................................. 175

Figure 39: Layout of Large House First Floor ....................................................................... 175

Figure 40: Elevation of a large house .................................................................................... 176

Figure 41: Layout of Community Center and Nursery Ground Floor ................................... 177

Figure 42: Layout of Community Center and Nursery First Floor ....................................... 178

Figure 43: Elevation of Community Center and Nursery ...................................................... 179

Figure 44: Layout of Health Centre Ground Floor ................................................................ 180

Figure 45: Layout of Health Centre First Floor ..................................................................... 181

Figure 46: Elevation of Health Cent ...................................................................................... 182

14
LIST OF TABLES

Table 1: Construction contribution and its corresponding resource affected .......................... 33

Table 2: Showing works, affected resource, phase of construction, cumulative impact

assessment and possible mitigation strategies ......................................................................... 34

Table 3: Estimated housing capacity per unit .......................................................................... 43

Table 4: Showing Stormwater multiple criteria analysis ......................................................... 46

Table 5: Showing weighting factor for analysis categories ..................................................... 47

Table 6: Showing Alternative and comparison analysis by percentage .................................. 47

Table 7: Showing estimated costing of all water and wastewater systems.............................. 48

Table 8: Showing estimated costing of roadworks .................................................................. 49

Table 9: Showing overall building frame costs ....................................................................... 50

Table 10: Showing main features of buildings being designed for housing development ...... 50

Table 11: Showing total unit prices ......................................................................................... 51

Table 12: Showing overall solution prices............................................................................... 51

Table 13: Showing Objectives and Measure of Effectiveness to be assessed. ........................ 55

Table 14: Showing Assessment of alternatives based on Measure of Effectiveness. .............. 56

Table 15: Showing Weighting factors of objectives. ............................................................... 57

Table 16: Showing multiple criteria analysis of Alternative sites. .......................................... 58

Table 17: Showing ranking and measure of effectiveness for multiple criteria analysis. ....... 59

Table 18: Showing layout multiple criteria analysis................................................................ 60

Table 19: Showing weighting factor for analysis categories ................................................... 61

Table 20: Showing Alternative and comparison analysis by percentage ................................ 62

Table 21: Showing Sewer Pipe Sizes....................................................................................... 66

Table 22: Showing associated ranking description for multiple criteria analysis. .................. 71

Table 23: Showing Stormwater multiple criteria analysis ....................................................... 72

15
Table 24: Table xy: Showing weighting factor for analysis categories ................................... 73

Table 25: Showing Alternative and comparison analysis by percentage ................................ 73

Table 26: showing the differences between flexible and rigid pavements (adapted from

(Anderson)) .............................................................................................................................. 90

Table 27: Results for ESAL calculations ................................................................................. 93

Table 28: Calculations to determine thickness of each layer for pavement design ................. 95

Table 29: ENGINEER’S COST ESTIMATE (EX VAT): For Single Bedroom Apartment RC

Alternative 1........................................................................................................................... 116

Table 30: ENGINEER’S COST ESTIMATE (EX VAT): For Single Bedroom Apartment Steel

Alternative 2........................................................................................................................... 123

Table 31: ENGINEER’S COST ESTIMATE (EX VAT): For Large House RC Alternative 1

................................................................................................................................................ 137

Table 32: ENGINEER’S COST ESTIMATE (EX VAT): For Large House Steel Alternative 2

................................................................................................................................................ 144

Table 33: ENGINEER’S COST ESTIMATE (EX VAT): For Community Centre and Nursery

RC Alternative 1 .................................................................................................................... 158

Table 34: ENGINEER’S COST ESTIMATE (EX VAT): For Community Centre and Nursery

Steel Alternative 2.................................................................................................................. 170

Table 35: Steel Moment Resisting Framed Small House ...................................................... 190

Table 36: Steel Moment Resisting Framed Health Center ................................................... 198

Table 37: Steel Moment Resisting Framed Two Bedroom Apartment ................................. 206

Table 38: Showing Cost Estimation of Reinforced Concrete Moment Resisting Framed Small

House ..................................................................................................................................... 221

Table 39: Cost Estimation of Reinforced Concrete Moment Resisting Framed Health Center

................................................................................................................................................ 237

16
Table 40: Cost Estimation of Reinforced Concrete Moment Resisting Framed Two Bedroom

Apartment .............................................................................................................................. 252

17
1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

This report aims to present the findings of a feasibility study conducted for a residential
development of 500 persons within the Trincity Area of east Trinidad named, the Trinscape
Development Project. The study considers an assessment of pre-existing climactic, geological,
hydrological, topographical, soil, hydraulic and seismic conditions of the proposed area. The
population per household was obtained using census data and housing allocations were
determined accordingly, as well as additional services and buildings required for the
community. This data was then used to draft alternative layouts, drainage systems and road
networks. These alternatives were then assessed using a multiple criteria analysis to evaluate
the most viable option to be employed. Using the multiple criteria analysis and considerations
of social distancing, security, sustainability, environmental impact and economic viability, the
most suitable alternative of its category was chosen.

18
2.0 INTRODUCTION

This project outlines a feasibility study to choose appropriate designs of materials, drainage
systems, pavement systems and site layouts from proposed alternatives. The proposed
construction site is in north-east Trinidad, Trincity, currently being used as agricultural land.
The development must be designed to meet specifications of all regulatory bodies; therefore,
carful considerations must be made in designing green spaces, water, and wastewater systems,
building size and material and pavement systems. This feasibility study considers possible
viable alternatives for the systems mentioned to be compared and evaluated based on a criterion
which emphasised the economic value, environmental impact and sustainability and social
implications. The overall development to be constructed must be effective in housing the pilot
group comfortably, with all necessary utilities and amenities for a healthy, sustainable
development.

2.1 SCOPE

The scope of this project involves all works required to be done during the construction as well
as a costing and preliminary designs for construction. A critical part of the project’s scope was
the feasibility of the development, given existing conditions, economic viability, and
environmental and social impact. This scope can be described as:
- Design of two alternative layouts, with unique roadways, buildings, and water/wastewater
management systems.
- Design and comparison of two alternative structural materials for use in housing units
- Development of utilities and subdivisions of development as outlined by the Town and
Country Planning Division.
- Preliminary Environmental Impact Assessment for consideration of sustainable development
and construction.
- Provisions for sustainable operations and systems which allows for more eco-friendly living
in the development.
- Design of wastewater, stormwater and potable water supply which ensures structural integrity
of site is not compromised and environmentally friendly, as outlines by the Water and Sewage
Authority.

19
- Development of the transport system roadways with consideration of stormwater management
and structural requirements as outlined by the American Association of Structural Highway
and Transportation Officials.

2.2 OBJECTIVES

1. To design alternative structural and material systems to be compared for feasible use in the
residential development at Trincity. These alternatives include building design and layout,
material use in structural building and stormwater system and structural roadway designs.
2. To conduct a preliminary environmental impact assessment to evaluate the sustainability and
overall contribution to the environment due to the construction of this site.
3. To research and enforce regulatory standards from associated bodies, ensuring that all
building and environmental codes are adhered to with regards to structural, environmental,
water and wastewater and human comfort.
4. To design systems to ensure the housing development is sustainably developed and
operational.
5. To use multiple criteria analysis to determine the most feasible alternative from those
proposed and analysed.
6. To combine results of the multiple criteria analysis with the social, economic and
environmental cumulative effects to assess the viability of the entire project.

2.3 PROJECT OVERVIEW

The proposed site is to occupy an area of roughly 7.4 hectares, with several buildings no greater
than 2 storeys in height to meet the guidelines of Town and Country Planning Division. These
buildings will house 500 persons, belonging to various family sizes, ranging from 1-6 persons.
The site will have to be accessed off the Churchill Roosevelt Highway through a temporary
access road which would have to be created, until the final design road is employed for
residents to use a similar access route. The development shall also consist of a health enter,
community centre and nursery as per guidelines of housing developments of its size.

20
2.4 PROJECT REFERENCES

Guidelines to sub-division, residential and road layout, site development standards, engineering
standards are
• Guide to Developers and Applicants for Planning Permission (Ministry of Planning 1988)
• Practical Manual of Land Development (Colley 2005)
• WASA Guidelines for Design and Construction of Water and Wastewater Systems in Trinidad
and Tobago (WASA 2014)

Guidelines to the preliminary design of infrastructure and structural systems are

• Preliminary Design of Structural Members (Clarke 2018)
• Stormwater Control: Storm Sewers and Detention (Mays 2011)
• AASHTO Guide for Design of Pavement Structures (AASHTO 1993)
• Traffic and Highway Engineering (Garber and Hoel 2009)

Legislation relating to land and water use

• Town and Country Planning Act (1969)
• Environmental Management Act No. 34 (1995)
• Water and Sewage Authority Act
• Waterworks and water conservation Act

21
3.0 FEASIBILITY ANALYSIS

3.1 PROJECT DESCRIPTION

Trincity is a planned community in northern Trinidad which consists of residential,

commercial, and agricultural land. Trincity is located south of Tunapuna, north of Piarco, with
coordinates: 10° 38′ 7″ N, 61° 21′ 22″ W. This area is publicly accessed via the Churchill
Roosevelt Highway (CRH) and is home to many rural and urban areas. The area is serviced by
the Arena reservoir, Caroni water treatment plant and belongs to the Tunapuna-Piarco regional
corporation. Population growth and wealth distribution has forced the population to live
unsustainably, under poor conditions, accentuating the need for housing developments which
can be easily accessible, affordable and facilitate a sustainable lifestyle.

Figure 1: Google Map of Trinidad showing the area of the proposed development

The Trincity area consists of several residential developments, usually of a loop format with
building restrictions of 8.5m from ground floor to ridging of the roof, as specified by Town

22
and Country Planning Division- Tunapuna. The site of interest currently exists south of the
CRH, currently being used as cultivated land for agricultural purposes.

Figure 2: Map of Trincity showing the proposed site

The aims of this project include:

1. To design a residential development that caters for families of varying size and income while
being sustainably designed, economical and considering the implications of social distancing
within the given site of Trincity.
2. To design alternative layouts and designs for housing developments, wastewater and
stormwater management and pavement designs.
3. To conduct feasibility studies on all alternatives considered to assess the most viable option.
4. To conduct preliminary design of the most feasible alternatives chosen.
5. To determine the overall feasibility of construction of a housing development in the area of
study.

23
3.2 PRELIMINARY STUDY

A desktop study was done as the soul form of research in planning this development due to
social distancing restrictions of COVID-19. The desktop study encompassed the use of satellite
imagery, various maps, including topological, hydrological, and geological. Interviews and
questioners were not conducted due to social distancing and inability to reach out to residents
of the area otherwise. The collected data was then considered in planning the development.

3.2.1 Topography

Topography can be defined as the layout of both the natural and artificial features of an area.
Upon examination of the contour map below, it can be seen that at the area for the development,
the elevation of the land is relatively flat and there are no landforms such as mountains or hills.
The contour map below shows the areas of highest elevations. These are the better places to
build the areas of lower elevation would eb more susceptible to flooding. The Arouca River
runs near to the development, however it does not have any effect of the proposed site plan.
Additionally, the land is seen to be higher than mean sea level. The figure below shows the
various contours of the map at the site of the development.

Figure 3: Contour map of Trincity showing the area of the proposed development

24
3.2.2 Climate

The microclimates around Trinidad and Tobago vary from all parts of the island, although
following the generally tropical behaviour, some parts are subjected to more harshly
weathering than others. The climate must be considered when designing a project, this would
indicate common temperature ranges and extreme values, as well as humidity, rainfall intensity
and frequency. Knowledge of these climatic factors allows for a more comprehensive,
permeant design, which would not have to be further modified or altered to meet the
requirements of that climate. The Trincity area is part of the Tunapuna-Piarco Regional
Corporation, therefore meteorological data for the development was obtained through the
Trinidad and Tobago Metrological Service.
The Meteorological service records average temperatures ranging from 31.3°C to 22.7°C with
a mean daily temperature of 26.5°C. Data collected from the year 2020 was analysed, showing
a maximum temperature above the averaged range, recording a maximum value of 34.4°C on
May 20th 2020 and a minimum of 19.5°C on January 4th 2020. This data also indicated a
maximum rainfall intensity of 59.5mm in early June.
The figure below from the Trinidad and Tobago Meteorological Service indicates the
probability of rainfall and intensity for the first dekad of February 2021. This data shows that
Trincity/Piarco has roughly a 60% chance of <=10mm of rainfall expected.

Figure 4:Showing probability of rainfall and intensity for first dekad of February 2021. (TTMS 2021)

25
3.2.3 Hydrology

The natural drainage of the Trincity can be described as dendritic; since surface runoff flows
from higher elevations of the Northern Range to lower elevations such as Trincity, where
watercourses are cut through permeable rocks, gravel, and soft sands. This drainage system
results in larger catchments being drained by one central river.
The proposed site is neighboured by the Arouca River to the east which drains a catchment of
roughly 4.86km² north of the site. This watercourse raises concern for a storm event being able
to fill its capacity, breaking its bank and flooding the development.

Figure 5:Showing proposed site proximity to Arouca river (East)

26
 Figure 6:Catchment of Arouca River(red)

Figure 7:Longest river from catchment.(Light Blue)

27
From preliminary analysis the Arouca River drains 4.86km² of land north of the site, passing
along a main water channel of 3283m with a change in elevation of 216.61m. The planned
development would have to meet the requirement of predevelopment flow equating post
development flow as outlined by the Ministry of Works and Infrastructure, which indicates a
detention pond is required to control this flow before the site is drained to the Arouca river
before flowing south to the Caroni River.
The type of soil in this area is heavily clayey-loam which has poor infiltration rates, leading to
high rates of surface runoff. High surface runoff would lead to large volumes of water
downstream, near the site, therefore potential flood risks may be high.

3.2.4 Geology and Soils

The geological and soil conditions for the area was studied using mapworks, experience of
professionals in the area and geological knowledge. The area of Trincity that was proposed for
the site had been known to flood in previous years, upon further investigations of soil maps it
was discovered that the main type of underlying soils of that area was Clay Loam which has
low infiltration rates. Due to the soils of the area, the initial abstraction for storm events is very
low, quickly saturating the soils and causing a flood event. From the Cross section observed of
the nearby Arouca river, a higher than normal bank is present causing water to pool and slowly
flow downwards under natural grade.

Figure 8: Showing Clay-Loam of the Trincity Area

28
 Figure 9:Showing Geological map of Trinidad. (KUGLER 1961)

Q = Quaternary; Cz = Cenozoic; Mz = Mesozoic; Note: Qf (= Quaternary fan deposits) are

buried in the west by Qal (= Quaternary alluvium) of the Caroni swamp, and in the east are
exposed and highly dissected by modern streams

From the figure above, it can be noted that the Trincity area is between the Northern range,
metased rocks and the area along the Caroni swamp where Quaternary fan deposits and
Quaternary alluvium can be found. These are recent formations of rocks (Quaternary period)
and are the main type of rocks found in this area. Soil profiles do not indicate the that these
rocks have weathered to form the sands within the area, suggesting they are of good condition
and non-porous.

29
3.2.5 Public Services and Utilities

Public services and utilities are imperative to the economic and social wellbeing of a society.
They aid in providing and satisfying our everyday needs such as electricity, water,
telecommunication services and transportation.
Electricity
The Trinidad and Tobago Electricity Commission (T&TEC) is responsible for the supply of
power and electricity services to residential, commercial, industrial and street lighting
customers throughout Trinidad and Tobago. As such, they would be the body responsible for
providing the electrical services to this new development. This would include safe wiring for
electricity in all housing units, the nursery and community centre and the health centre as well
as streetlights throughout.
Water
The company responsible for the delivery of potable water and wastewater services to the
population of Trinidad and Tobago is the water and Sewage Authority (WASA). For this
development, water will be supplied form the Arouca Reservoir as well as the Caroni Water
Treatment plant.

3.2.6 Vegetation

At the site for the development, the area is largely covered by trees and wild shrubbery, but not
enough to be classified as a forest. It may be considered as a secondary forested area. In the
figure below, the type of vegetation as well as tree cover on the site can be identified using the
Forest Association and Land Cover for Trinidad.

30
Figure 10: The Forest Association and Land Cover for Trinidad

31
3.2.7 External Area and Social Conditions

Social condition is the situation in a society that is based on economic income, occupation and
level of education of the populace. Trinidad has a mix of persons that falls within the lower,
middle and upper class. The surrounding area of the site is forested and thus it is required to be
cleared an prepared for construction and to provide access from the development’s road,
connecting to the highway. The external area of the site is mainly urban with the adjacent road
being a major highway. In rather close proximity, there is a mall, grocery, a plethora of food
places, hardwares and other development such as the upper class, Millennium Park.

3.3 PRELIMINARY ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT

The environmental impact assessment (EIA) for a given project is an assessment of how
human, animal and environment are affected by works being done on the designated site. A
preliminary EIA evaluates the nature and extent of works, along with its possible impact on the
surroundings. The use of the Environmental Impact Assessment is to ensure the project does
not harm the surroundings, causing construction to be unsustainable in that area. Through this
assessment, works can be altered or relocated as desired for a more positive environmental
impact.
The EIA conducted for this project was of a qualitative nature, to apply for a certificate of
environmental clearance (CEC) from the Environmental Management Agency (EMA). This
EIA consists of the proposed works, likely affected resources, impact, and possible mitigation
strategies for three stages of the project’s life: namely preconstruction, during construction and
post construction.

Proposed Works to be done:

Clearing of site and Earthworks
Construction of temporary road networks and drainage systems
Construction of houses and other structural units
Instillation of utilities (Poles and pipes) and drainage systems
Paving of roads and construction of sidewalks
Removal of construction and demolition waste.

32
The affected resources can be classified through analysis of pollution and damage to
ecosystems as follows:

Table 1: Construction contribution and its corresponding resource affected

Construction Contribution Resource affected

Water pollution and disruption of Water quality

waterways
Emissions and air pollution Air quality

Noise pollution Noise

Destruction of agriculture and natural Ecological and Erosion

environment and land pollution.

33
Table 2: Showing works, affected resource, phase of construction, cumulative impact assessment and possible mitigation strategies

Works Affected Phase of Construction Cumulative Possible

Resource Impact Mitigation

Pre-Construction During Post Construction
Assessment Strategies
Construction

Mobilization, Site Noise Excessive noise Low impact with Use of protective

clearance and generated from temporary PPE for site

Earthworks machinery due to consequences due personnel.

initialization of to no nearby Instillation of

site, clearing land residents. exhaust mufflers

and earthworks on machinery.

Ensure all

machinery is well

greased and

maintained.

34
Ecological and Disturbances to High Impact with Avoid natural

Erosion natural consequences established

watercourses and that may last for habitats of

destabilization of many years to endemic species.

soil in excavation come. Low Avoid filling

erosion impact natural ponds.

which can be very Ensure

temporary. excavation is

done at an angle

less than angle of

repose and

shoring is used

where necessary.

Air quality Greenhouse Moderate Impact Use of proper

gasses emitted by with long term PPE by site

machinery. personnel.

35
 Airborne dust and effects which can Ensure all

sand particles be minimized. machinery and

affecting air Dust has low vehicles are well

quality. impact with very maintained to

temporary reduce emissions

consequences.

Construction of Noise Noise generated Low impact with Use of protective

temporary road by machinery temporary PPE for site

networks and consequences due personnel.

drainage systems to no nearby Instillation of

residents. exhaust mufflers

on machinery.

Ensure all

machinery is well

36
 greased and

maintained.

Water quality Disruption and Moderate Impact Avoid rerouting

rerouting of with of waterways,

natural consequences rather burry

watercourses, that may last a pipelines to

introducing moderate amount continue existing

construction of time. routes.

contaminants Avoid spillage or

release of any

contaminant onto

the site.

Ecological Local marine High Impact with

ecosystems consequences

affected by new that may last for

37
 routes and loss of many years to

natural habitats come.

Construction of Noise Noise due to Low impact with Use of protective

houses and other machinery and temporary PPE for site

structural units construction consequences due personnel.

to no nearby Instillation of

residents. exhaust mufflers

on machinery.

Ensure all

machinery is well

greased and

maintained.

Air Quality Greenhouse gases Moderate Impact Use of proper

expelled by with long term PPE by site

machinery and effects which can personnel.

be minimized.

38
 dust produced in Dust has low Ensure all

construction. impact with very machinery and

Airborne dust and temporary vehicles are well

sand particles consequences. maintained to

affecting air reduce emissions.

quality.

Instillation of utilities Noise Noise generated Low impact with Use of protective

(Poles and pipes) and in planting poles temporary PPE for site

drainage systems and excavation consequences due personnel.

for lines and to no nearby Instillation of

drainage residents. exhaust mufflers

on machinery.

Ensure all

machinery is well

greased and

maintained.

39
Paving of roads and Noise Noise produced Low impact with Use of protective

construction of by machinery temporary PPE for site

sidewalks used in pavement consequences due personnel.

and sidewalk to no nearby Instillation of

construction residents. exhaust mufflers

on machinery.

Ensure all

machinery is well

greased and

maintained.

Air quality Greenhouse gases Moderate Impact Use of proper

emitted by with long term PPE by site

machinery. effects which can personnel.

Airborne dust and be minimized. Ensure all

sand particles Dust has low machinery and

impact with very vehicles are well

40
 affecting air temporary maintained to

quality. consequences. reduce emissions.

Erosion Vibrating Low impact Ensure

equipment which can be excavation is

causing soils to temporary. done at an angle

erode at a rapid less than angle of

rate repose and

shoring is used

where necessary.

Removal of Noise Excessive noise Low impact with Use of protective

construction and from cleaning, temporary PPE for site

demolition waste. loading and consequences due personnel.

removal of to no nearby Instillation of

construction residents. exhaust mufflers

waste from the on machinery.

site

41
 Ensure all

machinery is well

greased and

maintained.

Air Quality Greenhouse gases Moderate Impact Use of proper

produced by with long term PPE by site

machinery. effects which can personnel.

Airborne dust and be minimized. Ensure all

sand particles Dust has low machinery and

affecting air impact with very vehicles are well

quality. temporary maintained to

consequences. reduce emissions.

42
 3.4 PRELIMINARY DESIGN CONCEPT

The Central Statistical Office of Trinidad and Tobago was used to collect census data from the
year 2011, although older information, this was the most recent data that had been collected.
Household population was analysed and based on nationwide figures; it was decided that
houses would cater for 1-6 persons. The data assisted in the following table being done to
estimate housing capacity per unit.

Table 3: Estimated housing capacity per unit

No. of persons per

Percentage Population No. of dwelling
No. of Persons Percentage catered household
Household units required
assumed.
1 19.11 20 100 100
2 20.15 20 100 50
3 19.41 20 100 34
4 18.61 20 100 25
5 10.96 15 75 15
6 6.07 5 25 5
TOTAL 100 500 229
The Water and Sewage Authority Water and Wastewater Guide was also consulted to cater for
the needs of potable water and waste/storm water disposal. The guide was used to obtain the
requirements for all pipeline sizes and gradients. This was also used to calculate the wastewater
required to be treated by use of the 280lpd stipulation, as well as a residency of 4.5 persons per
unit with a peak factor of 3.

43
Preliminary Layout 1
3 Studio Apartment Buildings
6 Single Bedroom apartment buildings
8 Double Bedroom Apartments buildings
3 Double Bedroom Townhouses buildings
10 Triple Bedroom Townhouse Buildings
15 Small houses
5 large Houses

Figure 11: Showing preliminary Layout 1

44
Preliminary Layout 2
62 Single Bedroom Apartment Buildings
57 Double Bedroom Apartment Buildings
40Small Houses
5 Large Houses

Figure 12: Showing preliminary layout 2

45
3.5 ECONOMIC ANALYSIS

3.5.1 Water, Storm Water and Waste Water Management

Table 4: Showing Stormwater multiple criteria analysis

Stormwater Material Selection

Criteria Remark Alternatives

Concrete HDPE

Cost Capital and $8 107.50 $632.50

construction
cost
Effectiveness Efficiency of 7 9
transporting
water
Ease of Ability to 5 8
Employment properly install
to specifications
Sustainability Embodied 5 7
energy,
environmental
impact, and
pollution risk
Maintenance Frequency of 7 9
labour and
materials for
maintenance
Time for How long from 4 8
construction instillation to
usage

46
 Table 5: Showing weighting factor for analysis categories

Criteria Rank Relative Weight Weight Factor

Cost 1 6 28.57

Sustainability 2 5 23.81

Effectiveness 3 4 19.05

Maintenance 4 3 14.29

Ease of Employment 5 2 9.52

Time for
6 1 4.76
construction

Total 21 100

Table 6: Showing Alternative and comparison analysis by percentage

Criteria Alternatives

Concrete Sewers Corrugated HDPE pipelines

Cost 2.22 28.57

Sustainability 17.01 23.81

Effectiveness 14.82 19.05

Maintenance 11.11 14.29

Ease of Employment 5.95 9.52

Time for construction 2.38 4.76

Total 53.49 100.00

47
 The Corrugated HDPE pipeline was found to be 46.51% more viable of an option, being a

much better alternative to the traditional concrete system in all categories considered, therefore

it was chosen as the stormwater sewer material.

Table 7: Showing estimated costing of all water and wastewater systems

No. Of
Description Unit Unit Price ($TTD) Total($TTD)
Units

HDPE Stormwater
Meter(m) 632.50 609 385 192.50
sewer pipeline

Cement Concrete

Sanitary Sewer Meter(m) 8 107.50 2255 18 282 412.50

Pipelines

Kerb and Slipper Meter(m) 506.00 3835 1 940 510.00

Potable water
Meter(m) 550.00 1715 943 250.00
supply line

Capital Cost=10 350 000.00

Package Plant Plant Shipping/Instillation= 2 587 1 12 937 500.00

500

Cubic meter
Detention basin 1250.00 270 337 500.00
(m³)

Extended Aeration Cubic meter

1250.00 300 375 000.00
Pond (m³)

Total Cost 34 901 365.00

48
3.5.2 Pavement Management

Table 8: Showing estimated costing of roadworks

Total Unit
Description Length/ m Width/ m Depth/ m Total
Volume/ m3 Cost $

Surface Layer 1914.9 6.1 0.127 1483.47 852000 1263919.02

Granular Base
1914.9 6.1 0.1778 2076.86 480 996893.876
Course

Subbase 1914.9 6.1 0.5334 6230.59 400 2492234.69

Excavation 1914.9 6.1 0.08382 979.092 175 171341.135

Total Cost 4924388.72

49
 3.5.3 Structural Systems

Table 9: Showing overall building frame costs

ALTERNATIVE OVERALL COST ($TT)

Alternative 1 Total RC building cost $ 47,161,436.94
Alternative 2 Total Steel building cost $ 61,014,487.39

Table 10: Showing main features of buildings being designed for housing development

Area sqft Cost Price per sqft

Building
RC Steel RC Steel RC Steel

Single Bedroom
1260 1260 $ 4,435,010.08 $ 2,577,481.95 $ 3,519.85 $ 2,045.62
Apartment

Two Bedroom
843.9 843.9 $ 4,105,569.68 $ 2,650,315.98 $ 4,865.04 $ 3,140.59
Apartment

Small House 1247.7 1247.7 $ 6,101,603.98 $ 7,638,823.54 $ 4,889.88 $ 6,121.82

Large House 1840 1840 $ 7,560,524.06 $ 12,099,527.20 $ 4,108.98 $ 6,575.83

Community
4050 4050 $ 13,339,106.78 $ 18,758,530.07 $ 3,293.61 $ 4,631.74
Center / Nursery

Health Center 3255 3255 $ 11,619,622.36 $ 17,289,808.65 $ 3,569.76 $ 5,311.75

TOTAL 12496.6 12496.6 $ 47,161,436.94 $ 61,014,487.39 $ 24,247.12 $ 27,827.34

50
Table 11: Showing total unit prices

Building Units Total Price for all units ($TT)

RC Steel
Single Bedroom Apartment 74 $ 328,190,745.92 $ 190,733,664.30
Two Bedroom Apartment 57 $ 234,017,471.76 $ 151,068,010.86
Small House 40 $ 244,064,159.20 $ 305,552,941.60
Large House 5 $ 37,802,620.30 $ 60,497,636.00
Community Center / Nursery 1 $ 13,339,106.78 $ 18,758,530.07
Health Center 1 $ 11,619,622.36 $ 17,289,808.65
TOTAL 178 $ 869,033,726.32 $ 743,900,591.48

Table 12: Showing overall solution prices

Solution Price ($TT)

RC Steel
Structures $ 869,033,726.32 $ 743,900,591.48
Pavement $ 4,924,388.72 $ 4,924,388.72
Waste Water $ 34,901,365.00 $ 34,901,365.00

TOTAL $ 908,859,480.04 $ 783,726,345.20

51
3.6 SUSTAINABILITY

Sustainable construction involves the implementation of designs and materials which

maximize on the natural environment and results in minimum taxation of natural resources.

When choosing materials for construction, there must be a balance of economic value,

structural integrity, and sustainability. Construction is known as a high pollutant industry as

materials such as concrete and steel has high embodied energy, compared to wood and clay.

This project does consider the use of both steel and concrete, however, to reduce the carbon

footprint produced in construction, the Leadership in Energy & Environmental Design (LEED)

sustainable design guidelines was consulted.

Buildings were design with several windows on all sides to ensure natural sunlight and

ventilation through could be utilized, reducing the need for electrical lighting systems or

ventilation systems through the day. Buildings were oriented where possible to have their

shorter side in the East-West direction, to reduce heating on buildings through the day, due to

space efficiency and logistics, only roughly half the housing units were able to meet these

criteria. Green space and parks were provided through the site to allow for trees and plants to

be replaced, acting as a noise buffer from the highway, aiding in drainage and assisting to scrub

carbon dioxide on the development. Light fixtures and other electrical systems would be

Energy Star approved to ensure maximum energy efficiency and usage.

The use of solar water heaters would drastically reduce the high energy usage of commercial

heating units, this technology would reduce the amount of household energy consumption.

Although initially expensive units, their energy usage is low enough to see a significant savings

over time, as well as being an eco-friendlier alternative. Similarly, solar powered lights would

be used on the site, replacing the conventional streetlights. This technology is already

implemented in Trinidad and its use on a large scale can make a significant impact of overall

energy usage. These lights would utilize a light emitting diode (LED) bulb which requires very

52
low current while being very bright units, thus the sun’s energy can be harvested and utilized

for a more sustainable development (Coast 2019).

53
4.0 EVALUATION OF ALTERNATIVES

4.1 SITE LOCATION

Analysis of the Trincity area for construction of the residential development involved

considerations of the earthworks to be done, acquisition of land, accessibility, environmental

impact, social implications, and hydrological interference. A multiple criteria analysis was

done to compare the alternatives and determine the more viable area for construction. The

analysis uses a scale of 1-5, where 1 is regarded as the best possible scenario and 5 is worst

possible scenario.

Figure 13: Showing alternative site locations in the Trincity Area

54
 Table 13: Showing Objectives and Measure of Effectiveness to be assessed.

Criteria Measure of effectiveness Ranking

Earthworks Cut and Fill 1

Land Acquisition Land clearance/repossession 2

Vehicular Accessibility Roadway accessibility 3

Ecological Impact Environmental Impact 4

Stormwater Management Drainage provisions 5

Hydrological Interference Rivers 6

Proximity to commercial
Social Impact 7
district

55
 Table 14: Showing Assessment of alternatives based on Measure of Effectiveness.

Measure of Alternatives
Criteria
Effectiveness 1

/m³ net cut and fill

Earthworks 3 Earthworks
(Scale of 1-5)

/m² land and buildings

Land Acquisition being demolished 2 Land Acquisition

(Scale of 1-5)

/m road built/upgraded
Vehicular Accessibility 2 Vehicular Accessibility
(Scale of 1-5)

/m² agricultural land

Ecological Impact cleared 3 Ecological Impact

(Scale of 1-5)

/m drainage
Stormwater Stormwater
constructed/upgraded 2
Management Management
(Scale of 1-5)

/m river crossing the

Hydrological Hydrological
building area of 1km² 3
Interference Interference
(Scale of 1-5)

/m from business

Social Impact districts 4 Social Impact

(Scale of 1-5)

56
 Table 15: Showing Weighting factors of objectives.

Criteria Ranking Relative Weighting Weighting Factor

Earthworks 1 7 25.0

Land Acquisition 2 6 21.4

Vehicular
3 5 17.8
Accessibility

Ecological Impact 4 4 14.3

Stormwater
5 3 10.7
Management

Hydrological
6 2 7.2
Interference

Social Impact 7 1 3.6

TOTAL 28 100

57
 Table 16: Showing multiple criteria analysis of Alternative sites.

Alternatives
Criteria
1 2

Earthworks 15.00 5.00

Land Acquisition 8.56 4.28

Vehicular Accessibility 7.12 17.8

Ecological Impact 8.58 5.72

Stormwater Management 4.28 8.56

Hydrological Interference 4.32 2.88

Social Impact 2.88 1.44

Total 50.74 45.68

From the multiple criteria analysis conducted, it was determined that site #2 was the more

viable location for the construction of the residential development. This site was 5.06% more

viable than its counterpart and although not a large difference, this assessment was able to

select the most suitable alternative.

58
4.2 LAYOUT ALTERNATIVES:

The two alternative layouts developed in preliminary design were assessed using a multiple

criteria analysis. The analysis considers the use of space, drainage capability, technical ability,

and foreseeable traffic congestion. The effectiveness was measured using a scale of 1 to 5,

where 1 is most favourable conditions and 5 is least desirable.

Table 17: Showing ranking and measure of effectiveness for multiple criteria analysis.

Criteria Measure of Effectiveness Ranking

Land use for entire layout

Space efficiency 1
(Rating 1-5)

Ease of construction
Technical Ability 2
(Rating 1-5)

Number of vehicles on main

Vehicular Congestion roads 3

(Rating 1-5)

Ease of drainage of site

Stormwater Management 4
(Rating 1-5)

59
 Table 18: Showing layout multiple criteria analysis

Site Layout Selection

Alternatives
Criteria Remark
Layout 1 Layout 2

Land Occupied by

Space efficiency buildings and 3 3

amenities

Time, materials, and

Technical Ability difficulty in 4 3

construction

Possible traffic
Vehicular
produced by vehicles 3 2
Congestion
on main roads

Ease of stormwater
Stormwater
collection and 3 2
Management
drainage

60
Table 19: Showing weighting factor for analysis categories

Criteria Rank Relative Weight Weighting Factor

Space efficiency 1 4 40.00

Technical Ability 2 3 30.00

Vehicular 3 2 20.00

Congestion

Stormwater 4 1 10.00

Management

TOTAL 10 100.00

61
 Table 20: Showing Alternative and comparison analysis by percentage

Alternatives
Criteria
Layout 1 Layout 2

Space efficiency 24.00 24.00

Technical Ability 24.00 18.00

Vehicular Congestion 12.00 8.00

Stormwater Management 6.00 4.00

TOTAL 66.00 54.00

The multiple criteria analysis was used to determine the most suitable building layout for the

proposed site. There was a notable 12.00% difference in the final results, which revealed that

layout #2 was the most viable option.

62
5.0 PROPOSED DESIGN (PRELIMINARY ENGINEERING DESIGN,

MATERIALS AND DRAWINGS)

4.1 WATER, STORM WATER AND WASTE WATER MANAGEMENT

Analysis of drainage systems with considerations of grade has led to a design of subsurface
stormwater sewers. These systems would drain the site from the northern point of the site,
downwards to the southern point where it would be contained in a detention basin and released
into the nearby Arouca river at a rate no greater than that of predevelopment.
A system of kerb and slippers would be employed for surface drainage to the left and right of
each roadway into the stormwater sewer for each respective sub catchments. Engineering
calculations were conducted to size each sub catchment’s sewer size and alternatives of HDPE
pipelines and concrete sewers were considered as possible designs.
The criteria used in assessing the viability of each options included construction
cost/instillation, maintenance, aesthetics, ease of construction and sustainability which
considers the lifespan, tendency to pollute and economic impact of usage.
Construction cost/instillation considers works to be done to procure, build and/or install the
sewer system while maintenance refers to the frequency of cleaning, fixing, and upkeeping to
ensure systems run at desired efficiency. Aesthetics involves how visually pleasing the system
is to residents and visitors and how the system can upkeep its visual appeal. Ease of
construction, although being related to cost of instillation, involves the time of construction,
ability to maintain designated grade and ability to meet requirements of regulatory agencies.
Sustainability of the system is heavily dependent on its lifespan before critical maintenance,
material sustainability in construction and its reliability in ensuring that no harmful chemicals
or materials are leeched into the surrounding area which may be harmful to the environment.

5.1.1 Corrugated HDPE Pipe

High Density Polyethylene is a material which is known for its lightweight, durability and
longevity. HDPE is a flexible plastic material which can be made to industrial standard to resist
corrosion and weathering. These pipes are designed to be very low maintenance, eco-friendly
and sustainable. The system is durable enough to withstand high crushing pressures when
placed in a subsurface environment, therefore making them a viable option for use in
stormwater sewers.

63
Corrugated HPDE pipes, similar to Polyvinyl Chloride (PVC) are manufactured with a “bell”
at one end which allows for adjacent pipes to fit into it along with an “O” ring gasket which
creates a watertight seal, ensuring no water is leeched into the environment. These pipes can
also be manufactured with seamless manhole accessed, therefore eliminating the need for
further modifications, and reducing the likelihood of leaking.

Figure 14: Showing corrugated HDPE pipelines being installed

5.1.2 Concrete sewers

Like concrete culverts, sewers can be constructed from concrete to drain the site and transport
water to the detention basin. The concrete sewer system requires more time, raw materials, and
labour to be constructed, however the use of concrete is not sustainable, but can be done in situ
to size. This sewer type can be made square, of equal area as the circular pipes calculated,
however may be more likely to crack and spill, due to the ceramic nature of concrete. These
can also be premade into segments and joined using mortar on site, however this alternative
has a high probability of leaks.

64
Figure 15: Showing concrete stormwater drainage being constructed.

65
Table 21: Showing Sewer Pipe Sizes

Sewer Length Slope Total Catchment C td(mins) I Design Computed Pipe Flow Sewer Flow
(ft) Area (in/hr) Discharge(ft³/s) Diameter Size Velocity(ft/s) Time(mins)
Drained (ft) Used(ft)
(ft)
1.1 133.63 0.005 0.667389 1.1 0.8234
0.667389 6.499459 9.45 5.193038 0.424079 0.5 26.46134 0.084167

2.1 88.32 0.005 0.703385 2.1 0.8234

1.370774 6.583626 9.41 10.62102 0.867344 1 13.52996 0.108796

3.1 89.71 0.005 0.703385 3.1 0.8234

2.074159 6.692421 9.38 16.01975 1.308219 1.5 9.069921 0.164849

4.1 89.15 0.005 0.703385 4.1 0.8234

2.777544 6.85727 9.32 21.31511 1.740654 1.75 8.86629 0.167582

5.1 86.68 0.005 0.703385 5.1 0.8234

3.480929 7.024853 9.17 26.28302 2.146348 2.25 6.613641 0.218437

66
6.1 179.27 0.005 0.851089 6.1 0.8044

4.332018 7.24329 9.02 32.02833 2.615527 2.75 5.395097 0.553805

7.1 83.8 0.005 0.885219 7.1 0.7642

5.217237 7.797095 8.6 36.35476 2.968836 3 5.145755 0.271421

8.1 82.16 0.005 0.702737 8.1 0.8224

5.919974 8.068517 8.41 40.41197 3.30016 3.5 4.202467 0.32584

9.1 85.45 0.005 0.702737 9.1 0.8224

6.622711 8.394357 8.03 43.22677 3.530024 3.75 3.915801 0.363697

10.1 116.08 0.005 0.68692 10.1 0.7722

7.309631 8.758054 7.7 45.53471 3.718498 3.75 4.124871 0.469025

11.1 159.8 0.005 0.791218 11.1 0.7374

8.100849 9.227079 7.46 48.46794 3.958034 4 3.858913 0.690177

67
11.2 58.76 0.005 0.199508 11.2 0.8104 3.452424 14.18 2.292638 0.187224 0.25 46.72893 0.020958
12.1 155.89 0.005 0.486671 12.1 0.8412

11.2
8.787028 9.917256 7.36 52.0213 4.248212 4.25 3.668882 0.708163

12.2 58.76 0.005 0.245497 12.2 0.8448 3.452424 14.18 2.292638 0.187224 0.25 46.72893 0.020958
13.1 178.7 0.005 0.599139 13.1 0.7894

13.1
9.631664 10.62542 7.08 54.85915 4.479959 4.5 3.451075 0.863016

13.2 58.76 0.005 0.218214 13.2 0.8448 3.452424 14.18 2.292638 0.187224 0.25 46.72893 0.020958
14.1 140.91 0.005 0.532937 14.1 0.8506

13.2
10.38281 11.48844 6.9 57.8643 4.725368 5 2.9485 0.796507

14.2 58.76 0.005 0.170647 14.2 0.816 3.452424 14.18 2.292638 0.187224 0.25 46.72893 0.020958
15.1 92.19 0.005 0.531086 15.1 0.7958

14.2
AT WWTP: 11.08455 12.28494 6.76 60.48859 4.939675 5 3.082221 0.498504

68
69
Sample Calculation:
The length, L(ft) and area, A(ac) was found using AutoCAD measurements based on the design
chosen, as well as a slope, S of 0.005 ft/ft was used.
The site was then divided into contributing sub catchments using geospatial analysis and the area
of each respective sub catchment was recorded. Further analysis was conducted to evaluate the
relative land usages for each sub catchment, which was then used to find the runoff coefficient, C.
The respective time of concentration, tc and duration of rainfall, td was used to find the design
rainfall intensity and respective design flows. The size of pipe required was computed and upsized
to ensure all pipelines would accommodate flows.
Considering catchment 3.1:
L=89.71ft
S=0.005ft/ft
Area= 0.703385 ac
C= 0.8234
C*A= 0.703385*0.8234= 0.579167
ΣC*A= 1.707862ac
𝐿0.77 89.710.77
tc= 0.0195 ∗ 𝑆0.385 = 0.0195 ∗ 0.0050.385 = 6.499459mins

Inlet time= tc = 6.499495 mins

Considering upstream flow from 2.1:
Inlet time=6.583626mins
Flow time= 0.108796mins
Duration of flow= 6.583656+0.108796= 6.692421mins
Considering the IDF curve:
I= 198mm/hr
238.25
However, correcting for climate change: I= 198*1.2= 238.25 mm/hr= = 9.38in/hr
25.4

Design discharge, Q= k*i*(ΣC*A)

Where k=1
Design Q= 1*9.38*1.707862= 16.01975cfs
Using Manning’s Equation:
2.16∗𝑛∗𝑄𝑑𝑒𝑠𝑖𝑔𝑛 0.375 2.16∗0.014∗16.01975 0.375
Computed Required Diameter, D=( ) =( ) = 1.308219ft
√𝑆 √0.005

70
Pipe size used= 1.5ft
𝑄 4∗𝑄𝑑𝑒𝑠𝑖𝑔𝑛 4∗16.01975
Flow Velocity,v= 𝐴= 𝑃𝑖∗𝑃𝑖𝑝𝑒 𝑠𝑖𝑧𝑒 𝑢𝑠𝑒𝑑= = 9.06992 ft/s
𝑃𝑖∗1.50
𝐿 89.71
Sewer Flow time= 𝑣*60 = 9.06992 ∗ 60= 0.16485mins

5.1.3 Multiple Criteria Analysis

For the multiple criteria analysis, the type of drains is analysed and compared. The concrete sewers
and HDPE pipelines was compared based on a series of criteria of varying weighting in their
viability. This criterion included cost, effectiveness, ease of employment, sustainability,
maintenance, and time required.
For the purposes of this study the financial costs were quoted per unit length of each method with
estimations of the present time’s wages and cost of materials in Trinidad and Tobago Dollars
(TTD). An assumption of 25% the cost of construction would be due to installation and
maintenance would be considered as 5% the construction cost. Other criteria were graded on a
scale of 1-10, highlighting their suitability as follows:

Table 22: Showing associated ranking description for multiple criteria analysis.

Rank Description
1 Unacceptable
2 Very Poor
3 Poor
4 Below Satisfactory
5 Satisfactory
6 Above Satisfactory
7 Good
8 Very Good
9 Great
10 Most Desirable

71
Table 23: Showing Stormwater multiple criteria analysis

Stormwater Material Selection

Alternatives
Criteria Remark
Concrete HDPE

Capital and
Cost construction $5610.00 $384.83
cost
Efficiency of
Effectiveness transporting 7 9
water
Ability to
Ease of
properly install 5 8
Employment
to specifications
Embodied
energy,
Sustainability environmental 5 7
impact, and
pollution risk
Frequency of
labour and
Maintenance 7 9
materials for
maintenance
How long from
Time for
instillation to 4 8
construction
usage

72
Table 24: Table xy: Showing weighting factor for analysis categories

Criteria Rank Relative Weight Weight Factor

Cost 1 6 28.57

Sustainability 2 5 23.81

Effectiveness 3 4 19.05

Maintenance 4 3 14.29

Ease of Employment 5 2 9.52

Time for construction 6 1 4.76

Total 21 100

Table 25: Showing Alternative and comparison analysis by percentage

Criteria Alternatives

Concrete Sewers Corrugated HDPE pipelines

Cost 1.96 28.57

Sustainability 11.91 16.67

Effectiveness 13.34 17.15

Maintenance 10.00 12.83

Ease of Employment 4.76 7.62

73
 Time for construction 1.90 3.81

Total 43.87 86.65

The Corrugated HDPE pipeline was found to be 42.78% more viable of an option, being a much

better alternative to the traditional concrete system in all categories considered, therefore it was

chosen as the stormwater sewer material.

5.1.4 Detention Basin

The Ministry of Works and Transport, Drainage division outlines that developments must

contribute the same discharge rate from a site before and after development. The proposed project

would replace earthen farmland which has a much lower runoff coefficient than the concrete,

asphalt and other building materials proposed, therefore to ensure the site meets this criteria a

detention basin is used to hold water during a storm event and release it as required to meet

standards.

Design Calculation:

Predevelopment:

Given:

Area, A= 11.3088ac

K=1

C=0.4

L=1867ft

Change in elevation, Δz= 2.95ft

74
 𝐿 1867
tc= 0.0078*L0.77*(Δz)0.385 = 0.0078*18670.77*( 2.95 )0.385 = 30.8592mins

Using the IDF curve for a return period of 25 years, correcting for global warming of 1.2.

i= 3.97in/hr

Q=kCIA= 1*3.97*11.3088*0.4= 17.9583cfs

Post Development

Given:

Area, A= 11.3088ac

K=1

C=0.80719

L=1867ft

Change in elevation, Δz= 10ft

𝐿 1867 0.385
tc= 0.0078*L0.77*(Δz)0.385 = 0.0078*18670.77*( ) = 7.71483mins
10

Using the IDF curve for a return period of 25 years, correcting for global warming of 1.2.

i= 12.52in/hr

Q=kCIA= 1*12.52*11.3088*0.80719= 17.9583cfs

Using a rainfall duration of each event as twice the time of concentration, the following

hydrographs were produced.

75
 Figure 16: Showing graph of hydrographs predevelopment and post development.

The hydrograph above can be used to calculate the volume required by the detention basin by

finding the difference of the graphs for the predeveloped and post developed site, as shown in the

green area.

𝑏∗ℎ∗60 61.71842141∗30.8592107∗60
Qpredeveloped= Area under the graph= = = 33250.75 ft³
2 2

𝑏∗ℎ∗60 15.42965718∗7.71482859∗60
Qpostdeveloped= Area under the graph= = = 52902.37 ft³
2 2

Volume of detention pond= Difference in area= 52902.37-33250.75= 19651.62ft³

Therefore the detention pond shall be sized as 35ft * 35ft * 18ft

Total detention pond volume= 22050 ft³

76
 Figure 17: Showing dimensions of detention basin.

5.1.5 Surface Runoff

The site would follow the natural grade of the land, sloping southwards with a constant rate of

0.005. To drain surface runoff from precipitation events, a system of kerb and slippers would be

employed, draining sub catchments about the site into their respective stormwater sewer nodes.

This stormwater sewer as designed above would allow all sub catchments to drain into one main

line and collected in the detention basin designed above. The “A-frame” shape of roadways would

allow each road to drain half to its left and right, where the respective kerb would be graded

towards the sub catchment’s node where water is sent into a slipper and delivered to the node in a

77
subsurface manner. The site drains to the nearest kerb based on grading of plots to allow surface

runoff to easily flow onto kerbs.

By using the largest sub catchment of 0.885219 acres with a flow of 0.353309cfs the kerb system

for the entire development was designed.

This kerb system would be graded towards the node of each sub catchment and carry the

stormwater from the respective sub catchment to a catchment box where a smaller pipeline would

deliver it to the main stormwater drainage system.

Required Flow, QReq= 0.353 cfs

Using Manning’s equation, where n=0.014, S=0.005 and k=1.49

Through trial and error of triangular channel for kerb:

B=0.67ft and H= 0.67ft

Therefore:
𝐵∗𝐻 0.67∗0.67
A= = =0.22445ft²
2 2

P= H+Hyp = 0.67+ √0.672 + 0.672 = 1.6175ft

𝐴 0.22445
R= 𝑃= 1.16175 = 0.1388ft

From Manning’s Equation:

𝑘 1.49
QDesign+=𝑛*A*R2/3*S1/2 = 0.014*0.22445*0.13882/3*0.0051/2= 0.4528cfs

Since 0.4528>0.353

Then Section okay!

78
Figure 18: Showing Kerbs on sidewalks for wastewater collection

Figure 19: Showing detail of stormwater collection system

79
Figure 20: Showing front view of slipper gate for keeping debris out stormwater system

80
Figure 21: Showing Drainage Pattern of North side of Site

81
Figure 22: Showing Drainage pattern of South side of site

82
Figure 23: Showing kerbs along roadways (red) of the site

83
Figure 24: Showing Stormwater Sewer (yellow) and respective nodes for each sub catchment

84
5.1.6 Wastewater Treatment and Layout

Grey and blackwater from all buildings would flow into a centralized sanitary sewer, following

the grade of the land, southwards to the wastewater treatment plant. This sanitary sewer and

treatment plant were designed using the Water and Sewage Authority’s guidelines for wastewater.

Manholes for inspection and maintenance was located no more than 300ft away from each other

and kept in a straight line. All lines had a minimum diameter of 8 inches, with an increased size as

the system continues south. Each unit accounts for 4.5 persons as specified by WASA, with a daily

contribution of 280 litters of water per day each and a peak factor of 3. Given 228 units, the

wastewater treatment system is designed for capacity of 861840 Litres per day (189578.214

Gallons per day).

The figure below shows the layout of the sewer lines (purple) which carry a greywater and

blackwater to the central line along the middle of the site, eventually draining into the wastewater

treatment plant to the south. Manholes are located on the upper end of each run as per

specifications, with a size of 4 feet in diameter.

Based on the design flow and demand, it would be recommended that a wastewater package plant

be used as the treatment system with the extended aeration modification. According to the United

states Environmental Protection Agency, package plants can treat 0.002 to 0.5MGD, while the

extended aeration tanks are designed for flows of 0.002 to 0.1MGD. The design flow of 0.189578

MGD can be facilitated by this treatment type, however it is recommended that an additional

concrete tank be constructed to facilitate the extended aeration excess. This tank would need to

have a storage capacity of 410000 litres of water and be dimensioned, 15m x 15m x 1.8m deep.

85
5.1.7 Existing Hydrography

The Arouca river drains 4.86 acers of land north of the proposed site, this catchment is a mixture

of 81.91% developed (poor conditions) and 18.09% Greenspace. Geospatial analysis of Google

earth, ArcGIS and AutoCAD was used to determine these areas and divide the portions

accordingly. To ensure the site does not flood predevelopment, the critical section of the river was

obtained through trial and error to obtain the smallest cross section which this flow would pass

through. If the flow exceeds this critical section, the river’s banks will break and cause flooding to

the site from the given catchment.

The area of the critical section as shown in the figure below was estimated to be a triangular prism

of unit length of 1 foot. The peak flow of the catchment was then calculated, and comparisons

were made to evaluate the flood probability.

Figure 25: Showing critical section of Arouca River near the proposed Site.

86
The calculated area of the critical section was found to be 13.75m² which was found to be capable

of containing the calculated maximum flow from the 4.86 acer catchment of 2.38m³. It should be

noted however, that the approximation made by the triangle was less than the actual section due to

curvature, as well as the additional 0.5m bank bordering the river on the left. The calculated

capacity of the critical section was found to be 109m³ using the manning’s equation.

Figure 26: Showing Hyetograph for catchment flowing into Arouca River near proposed site.

87
5.2 PAVEMENT MANAGEMENT

In transport engineering, pavements are essential to transfer vehicle loads to the underlying soil

and subbase. The pavement should be design in such a way to accommodate a given loading

regime to ensure that the transmitted stresses are adequately reduced so the bearing capacity of the

subgrade is not exceeded (Mathew 2009). As such, the material composition, thickness, and

number of layers within the pavement structure must be determined.

Pavements are divided into two categories: flexible and rigid. The difference between these two

are the variation in strength and the manner in which the load is transmitted to the subgrade. The

subgrade stiffness and thickness helps to determine the pavement layer thickness, the number of

layers and possible improvements to subgrade stiffness and drainage itself (Interactive 2018).

5.2.1 Flexible Pavements

Flexible pavements are composed of sand and gravel, bonded with bitumen and possesses adequate

plasticity to absorb shock (Britannica 2015). It is composed of numerous layers of

material(Mathew 2009). Essentially, under loading, the pavement deflects, and the load is

transferred from the above layer, distributed and the transferred to the layer below. The top layer

possess the material with highest load bearing capacity (most costly) and the lowest layer contains

the material with the lowest load bearing capacity (least costly).

88
 Figure 27: Typical cross section of a flexible pavement (Mathew 2009)

5.2.2 Rigid Pavements

Rigid pavements are mainly composed of concrete which contains a mix of coarse and fine

aggregate and Portland cement, all reinforced with steel rod. It differs from a flexible pavement as

it is directly placed onto the prepared subgrade or on a single layer of granular or stabilized material

(Mathew 2009). In rigid pavements, the load is distributed over a wide span of area and transferred

to subsequent layers by slab action utilising plate theory. The pavement acts similar to an elastic

plate laying atop a viscous material and is to remain plane before and after loading.

Figure 28: Typical cross section of a flexible pavement (Mathew 2009)

89
 5.2.3 Flexible vs Rigid Pavements

Table 26: showing the differences between flexible and rigid pavements (adapted from (Anderson))

Parameter Flexible Pavement Rigid Pavement

Design Life Design life typically 10-20 years Design life typically 30+ years

Cost Lower Higher

Maintenance Higher maintenance cost as cracking may Lower maintenance cost since

occur overtime cracks do not regularly occur, but

when they do, they must be sealed

to prevent infiltration of water

Flexural Strength Low flexural strength High flexural strength

Strength of Road Highly dependent on sub-grade Less dependent on sub-grade

Effect of temperature High ability to expand and contract with Low ability to expand and contract

temperature and thus, expansion joints are with temperature and therefore

not needed need expansion joints

Embodied Energy 219.7 (tons of CO2) 1299.3 (tons of CO2)

Imperfections Low ability to bridge imperfections in sub- High ability to bridge

grade imperfections in sub-grade

90
 Figure 29: Load Distribution for Rigid and Flexible Pavements (Anderson)

From the comparison above, it can be noted that rigid pavements possess a longer design life and

higher flexural strength. However, the flexible pavement is inexpensive, more sustainable and

economical in the long run. Thus, it can be deduced that for the housing development, the more

appropriate type of pavement is the flexible pavement.

The goal of the structural design is to determine the material composition, thickness and number

of the different layers within a pavement structure required to accommodate a given loading regime

(Asphalt). This includes the surface/wearing course as well as the underlying base and subbase

layers. The subgrade layer is assumed to be infinite in both horizontal and vertical directions. For

flexible pavements, the design is centred upon concluding the appropriate layer thickness and

composition.

According the (AASHTO 1993) the traffic load is determined by the Equivalent Single Axle Loads

(ESAL). ESAL is a concept developed from information collected at the American Association of

State Highway Traffic Officials (AASHTO) to establish a damage relationship for comparing the

effect of axles carrying different loads. The traffic load is determined by the number of repetitions

an 18000lb (80kN) single axle load is applied to a pavement by two sets of dual tires.

91
However a limitation that was present in obtaining these calculations was the absence of traffic

data. Thus, accurate data for the Average Annual Daily Traffic (AADT) would not be present

which would ultimately affect the ESAL value used for the calculations.

Therefore, based on the number of parking spaces available, coupled with utility and maintenance

vehicles that would be in and out of the development, the AADT was assumed to be 300.

92
 Table 27: Results for ESAL calculations

%AADT AADT G Year Axles Fi Fd ESAL

Passenger 85 255 22.02 365 2 0.0001 1 409.9023

Cars

Small 2.5 7.5 22.02 365 2 0.066 1 7956.927

Maxi

Large 2 6 22.02 365 2 0.0511 1 4928.47236

Maxi

Light 5 15 22.02 365 2 0.0749 1 18059.8131

Truck

Heavy 3 9 22.02 365 2 6.6966 1 968806.497

Truck

Bus 2.5 7.5 22.02 365 2 2.2444 1 270583.742

Total 1270745.35

ESAL

93
 (1+𝑔)𝑛 −1
The Growth Factor, Gm can be calculated using the formula, Gm= 𝑔

Where:

- n is the analysis period in years. For this project, a design life of 20 years is used.

- g is the growth rate/100 and is not zero. The growth rate of 4% is representative of the annual

growth of vehicles on the highway. However, for this project, the growth rate can be assumed to

be 1% since the potential for further development in this area is limited.

(1+0.01)20 −1
Therefore, Gm= = 22.02
0.01

Figure 30: Recommended Level of Reliability (Classifications from AASHTO 1993)

From the table above, it can be deduced that the reliability, R, for the pavement in the development

should be 80%.

The Pavement Serviceability Index (∆PSI) is assumed to be 2.5.

The standard deviation, So, corresponding to a reliability of 80% is 0.45

94
Table 28: Calculations to determine thickness of each layer for pavement design

Reference Calculations Output

FLEXIBLE PAVEMENT DESIGN FOR ROAD

ESAL CALCULATION:

Assume an Average Annual Daily Traffic of 300 vehicles

AADT = 300 vehicles

n = 20 years

g = 1% = 0.01

(1 + 𝑔)𝑛 − 1
𝐺=
𝑔

(1+0.01)20 −1
Gm= = 22.02
0.01

𝐸𝑆𝐴𝐿 = 𝑓𝑑 × 𝐺 × 𝐴𝐴𝐷𝑇 × 365 × 𝑁𝑖 × 𝐹𝑖

𝐸𝑆𝐴𝐿 = 1.3 × 106

Surface Layer

Base Course

Subbase Course

Subgrade

Based on AASHTO

95
 Surface Layer (Asphalt Concrete)

Using HMA Dense Grade Asphalt Concrete

𝐸𝐴𝐶 = 400 000𝑝𝑠𝑖

𝑎1 = 0.42

Base Layer (Crushed Aggregate, Crusher run)

𝑀𝑟 = 30 000𝑝𝑠𝑖

𝑎2 = 0.14

𝑚2 = 0.90

Subbase (Granular Fill, Gravel)

𝑀𝑟 = 11000𝑝𝑠𝑖

𝑚3 = 0.9

𝑎3 = 0.08
AASHTO Subgrade (Clay Loam, CL)
recommendations 𝐶𝐵𝑅 = 4%

𝑀𝑟 = 1500 𝐶𝐵𝑅

𝑀𝑟 = 1500(4)

𝑀𝑟 = 6 000𝑝𝑠𝑖

Drainage coefficient and structural coefficient were based on

AASHTO
ASSHTO Road Test.
recommendations

𝑃0 = 4.2 (𝑓𝑙𝑒𝑥𝑖𝑏𝑙𝑒 𝑝𝑎𝑣𝑒𝑚𝑒𝑛𝑡𝑠)

𝑃𝑡 = 2 (𝑠𝑒𝑐𝑜𝑛𝑑𝑎𝑟𝑦 𝑟𝑜𝑎𝑑𝑠)

∆𝑃𝑆𝐼 = 𝑃0 − 𝑃𝑡

96
 ∆𝑃𝑆𝐼 = 4.2 − 2.0

∆𝑃𝑆𝐼 = 2.2

𝑆0 = 0.45

𝑅 = 80%

ESAL = 1.3 × 106

∆𝑃𝑆𝐼 = 2.2

𝑺𝑵𝑻 = 𝒂𝟏 𝑫𝟏 + 𝒂𝟐 𝒎𝟐 𝑫𝟐 + 𝒂𝟑 𝒎𝟑 𝑫𝟑

Surface Layer

Nomograph 𝑆𝑁1 = 𝑎1 𝐷1

From nomograph, 𝑆𝑁1 = 2.1

𝑎1 = 0.42
Surface

2.1 = 0.42(𝐷1 ) Thickness

= 5”
𝐷1 = 5"

97
 Base Layer

Nomograph 𝑆𝑁2 = 𝑎1 𝐷1 + 𝑎2 𝐷2 𝑚2

From nomograph, 𝑆𝑁2 = 2.35

𝑎2 = 0.14, 𝑚2 = 0.90

2.9 = (0.42)(5) + (0.14)(0.90)𝐷2 Base

𝐷2 = 6.35" Thickness

𝐷2 = 7" = 7”

Subbase

𝑆𝑁3 = 𝑎1 𝐷1 + 𝑎2 𝑚2 𝐷2 + 𝑎3 𝑚3 𝐷3
Nomograph From nomograph, 𝑆𝑁3 = 4.2

𝑎3 = 0.08 , 𝑚3 = 0.9

4.45 = (0.42)(5) + (0.14)(0.90)(7) + (0.08)(0.9)𝐷3

𝐷3 = 20.4" Subbase

Thickness
𝐷3 = 21"
= 21”

98
 Figure 31: Showing Nomograph used in pavement calculations

Final Design of Flexible Pavement

Asphalt Surface 5”

Base Layer 7”

21”
Subbase Layer

Existing Clay Loam

99
5.3 STRUCTURAL SYSTEMS

References Calculations Output

(Ullah 2017) DESIGN FOR PAD FOUNDATIONS USED Example shows calculations
for single column from the Community Centre/Nursery Design
This building was used as a reference due to it having the largest
area of all structures designed
P = 379.32kN
M = 56.97kN/m
Bearing capacity of Clay Loam soil = 160.88kN/m2
fck = 30MPa
fy = 410MPa
10% P = 379.32x1.1 = 417.25kN
Area by 10% = (417.25+379.32)/160.88 = 4.95m2
Footing Size (B) = √A = √4.95 = 2.22 OR 2.5m on each side
Soil reaction (qu) = 10%P(1.5)/A = 417.25x1.5/4.95 = 11.49kN/m
Factor Moment (M) = PxBx(LxD/2)2(0.5) = 417.25x2.5x(2.5-0.3/2)2(0.5)
= 631.09kN/m
Required depth = √(M/(0.138xfckxb)) =
√(631.09x106/(0.138x2500x30)) = 247mm
Mu = 0.9Asfyx(d-a/2)
56.97 = 0.20295As+9.163x10-6As2
As = 284mm
Use #13 bars uniformly distributed

100
References Calculations Output
(Youtube- DESIGN FOR FLOOR SLABS USED Example shows calculations for
Basics of Edge support (Case 4) Community Centre/Nursery
Concrete This building was used as a reference due to it having the largest
Design Part 09 area of all structures designed
2020)
End Plate design of 2-way slab Coefficients Method ACI 318-14
hf (mm) = [B(0.8+fy/1400)]/(36+9β) =
[4603(0.8+410/1400)]/(36+9(1.098)) = 5030 / 45.882 = 110mm use
min 125mm as per SBC
β = B/A = Long span(mm)/Short span(mm) = 4603/4191 = 1.098
Height of beam/ height of slab = h/hf = 550/125 = 4.4 > i.e. Ok to use
coefficients method
As, min = 0.0018bh = 0.0018x4191x125 = 942.98mm2
Use 8#13 bars (129x8 = 1032mm2)
Max reinforcement spacing, Smax = min of 2h OR 450mm
2h = 2x125 = 250mm i.e. Smax = 250mm
Min reinforcement spacing, Smin = max of 25mm OR db OR (4/3)dagg
dshort = hf – cover – db/2 = 125– 20 – 12.7/2 = 98.65mm
dlong = hf – cover – db - db/2 = 125– 20 – 12.7 – 12.7/2 = 85.95mm

101
References Calculations Output

(Ullah 2017) Single Bedroom Apartment (2 Storeys: Ground and 2 Units per
building) RC Design Alternative 1

Beam sizing b = 300mm

Span <6000mm
d = 550mm
d(mm) = span(mm)/26 + 350 = 537.58mm i.e. to the nearest 25mm =
550mm
b(mm) = 300mm
Column sizing
Span <6000mm
h = 300mm

Building Weight Calculation

Floor Slab Weight

Area = 114.45m2
Conc. Density = 2400N/m3
Thickness = 0.15m
Weight of Single slab = 114.45 x 24 x 0.15 = 412.02kN
Total Slab Weight = 2 Slabs = 824.04kN

Beam Weight
Max Span = 4.877m

102
No. of Beams = 22
No. of Floors = 2
Total Beam Weight = 24x0.55x0.3x2x4.877x22 = 849.77kN

Column Weight
For 1st floor:
Max Beam Span = 4.877m
No. of Columns = 15
Column height = 3.2m
h = 0.3m on both ends
No. of Floors = 1
1st and 2nd floor Column Weight = 24x15x3.2x0.32x1 = 103.68kN
For ground floor:
No. of Columns = 15
Column height = 1.22m
No. of Floors = 1
Ground floor column weight = 24x15x1.22x0.32x1 = 39.53kN
Total Column Weight = 103.68 + 39.53 = 143.21kN

Total Building Weight (W) = 824.04 + 849.77 + 143.21 = 1817.02kN

VERTICAL DISTRIUTION OF SEISMIC LOAD (a)

Assuming a linear distribution

103
 Seismic
Load =
181.7kN

Seismic Load (V) = 0.1W = 0.1(1817.02) = 181.7kN

V = F1 + F2
F2/ F1 = (1.22 + 3.2)/1.22, F2 = 3.62F1
181.7 = F1 + 3.62F1 = 4.62F1
F1 = 39.33kN
F2 = 142.37kN
Check:
39.33 + 142.37 = 181.7kN : OK

MOMENTS DUE TO SEISMIC LOAD (b)

104
Tributary width assuming equal spans in the short direction

(4.877 + 3.658)/2 = 4.268m

2 x (0.5 x 4.268) = 4.268m

∑ 𝐹𝑖=2,n = 142.37kN
∑ 𝐹𝑖=1,n = 181.7kN

MAC = (142.37x3.2)/(2(3-1)) = 113.9kN (INT.) 113.9/2 = 56.95kN (EXT.)

MAD = (181.7x1.22)/(2(3-1)) = 55.42kN (INT.) 55.42/2 = 27.71kN (EXT.)
MAB = (113.9 + 55.42)/2 = 84.66kN (INT.) 84.66/2 = 42.33kN (EXT.)

Summary ME for 2 frames (3-1) divided by 2

105
Assuming equal spans in the longer direction

∑ 𝐹𝑖=2,n = 142.37kN
∑ 𝐹𝑖=1,n = 181.7kN

MAC = (142.37x3.2)/(2(5-1)) = 56.95kN (INT.) 56.95/2 = 28.47kN (EXT.)

MAD = (181.7x1.22)/(2(5-1)) = 27.71kN (INT.) 27.71/2 = 13.85kN (EXT.)
MAB = (56.95+27.71)/2 = 42.33kN (INT.) 42.33/2 = 21.17kN (EXT.)

Summary ME for 4 frames (5-1) divided by 4

106
COLUMN AXIAL LOADS DUE TO SEISMIC FORCES (shorter direction)
(c)

Mo =
338.63kNm

Overturning Moment (Mo) = [𝐹1 (𝑑1) + 𝐹2 (𝑑1+𝑑2)] / No. of frames

Mo = [(39.33x1.22) + (142.37x(1.22+3.2))] / 3-1 = 338.63kNm

PA = PC
TMA Centre-line
PB/0.61 = (PC-PB)/3.658, PB5.997 = PC-PB, PC = PB6.997, PB = 0.143PC
PC = Mo/8.534 i.e. PC = 338.63/8.534
PC = 39.68kNm = PA

107
PB = 0.143(39.68) = 5.67kNm Live Load =
6.4kN/m

GRAVITY MOMENTS IN BEAMS (d) Dead Load

=
Live Load = 1.5kN/m2 x 4.268 = 6.4kN/m
10.67kN/m
Dead Load = 2.5kN/m2 x 4.268 = 10.67kN/m

For equal spans, for unit UDL of 1kN/m

MG, SUPPORT = -FL/10 = -4.2682/10 = -1.82kNm

MG, SPAN = 0.08FL = 0.08(4.2682) = 1.46kNm
MD, SUPPORT = -10.67(1.82) = -19.41kNm
MD, SPAN = 10.67(1.46) = 15.58kNm
ML, SUPPORT = -6.4(1.82) = -11.65kNm
ML, SPAN = 6.4(1.46) = 9.34kNm

GRAVITY MOMENT IN COLUMNS (e)

By moment distribution of sub frames

Internal Column

Beam Depth = 4877/26 + 350 = 537.58 or 550mm

Use beam width of 300mm
Assume column size is 300x300mm

108
Beams 550x300 I = bd3/12 = 300x5503/12 = 4.2x109mm4
Columns = 300x300 I = 3004/12 = 6.8x108mm4
Kb = I/L = (4.2x109)/4877 = 8.6x105mm3; KU =(6.8x108)/3200 =
2.1x105mm3;
KL =(6.8x108)/1220 = 5.57x105mm3
Total out-of-balance FEM = (DL x trib. area2)/12 – ((DL+LL) x trib.
area2)/12
FEM = (10.67x4.2682)/12 – ((10.67+6.4) x 4.2682)/12 =16.20 - 26 = -
9.8kNm

Mupper/lower = FEM x [(KU or KL) / (Kb + KU + KL)]

Mupper = 9.8x[2.1 / (8.6+2.1+5.57)] = 1.26kNm
Mlower = 9.8x[5.57 / (8.6+2.1+5.57)] = 3.36kNm

External Column
Total out-of-balance FEM = (DL x trib. area2)/12
FEM = (10.67x4.2682)/12 =16.20kNm

Mupper = FEM x [(KU or KL) / (0.5Kb + KU + KL)]

Mupper = 16.2x[2.1 / ((0.5)8.6+2.1+5.57)] = 2.84kNm
Mlower = 16.2x[5.57 / ((0.5)8.6+2.1+5.57)] = 7.54kNm Dead =
100.63kN
Live =
54.65kN
GRAVITY AXIAL FORCES IN COLUMNS (f)
By tributary area

Dead = (2.5x4.2682x2) + (4.42x0.32x24) = 91.08 + 9.55 = 100.63kN

Live = 1.5x4.2682x2 = 54.65kN
External Column Dead = 91.08/2 + 9.55 = 55.09kN

BEAM MOMENT (LONG) REBAR (g)

Ultimate Moment (Mu)

109
At supports U = 1.4D + 0.5L + 1.4E
Near mid-span, consider U = 1.4D + 1.6L

Internal support (top) Mu = 1.4(19.41) + 0.5(11.65) + 1.4(42.33) =

92.26kNm
External support (top) Mu = 1.4(19.41) + 0.5(11.65) + 1.4(21.17) =
62.64kNm
Span (bottom) Mu = 1.4(15.58) + 1.6(9.34) = 36.8kNm

Internal support rebar d = 550mm, b = 300mm

Mu = 0.9Asfy x (d-a/2) where a = Asfy/(0.85fc’b)
fc’ = 30MPa, fy = 410MPa
For internal
a = (As x 410) / (0.85x30x300) = 0.054As support
use
2#19bars
92.26 = 0.9As410 x (550-(0.054As/2))
For
92.26 = 369As x (550x10-6- 0.027x10-6As)
external
92.26 = 0.20295As – 9.963x10-6As2 support
use
As = 465.22mm2
2#19bars
i.e. use 2#19bars = 284x2 = 568mm2 > 465.22mm2 : OK
For span
ϕMn = 112.06kN > 92.26kN
rebar use
1#19bars
External support rebar
62.64 = 0.20295As – 9.963x10-6As2
As = 313.47mm2
i.e. use 2#19bars = 284x2 = 568mm2 > 313.47mm2 : OK

Span rebar
36.8 = 0.20295As – 9.963x10-6As2
As = 182.97mm2
i.e. use 1#19bars = 284x1 = 284mm2 > 182.97mm2 : OK

SUMMARY OF BEAM LONG REBAR:

110
Assume cover = 30mm
BEAM TRANSVERSE (SHEAR HOOP) REBAR (h)

w = 1.2 (D + L) = 1.2 (6.4+10.67) = 20.48kN/m

Mpr1 = As x 1.25fy(d -a/2) = 568 x 1.25 x 410 (550 – (0.054x568)/2) x
10-6 = 155.6kNm
Mpr2 = As x 1.25fy(d -a/2) = 568 x 1.25 x 410 (550 – (0.054x568)/2) x S = 100mm
Use 2T6
10-6 = 155.6kNm bars
Shear force in hinge, V = 0.75wL/2 +/- (Mpr1+Mpr2)/L
V = (0.75x20.48x4.268)/2 + (155.6+155.6)/4.268 = 105.69kN
Consider HTS hoops fyv = 410MPa
Av/s = V/fyvd = (105.69x103)/(410x550) = 0.47mm

111
For a spacing, s = 100mm, Av = 100x0.47 = 47mm2
Use 2T6 Av = 2x32 = 64 > 47mm2 : OK
SUMMARY OF BEAM TRANSVERSE REBAR:

COLUMN MOMENT REBAR (i)

300x300
Consider load case, U = 1.4D + 0.5L + 1.4E
Ultimate moments:
Internal Column, Mu = 0 + 0.5(3.36) + 1.4(27.71) = 40.47kN
External Column, Mu = 1.4(7.54)x(10.67/(10.67+6.4)) +
0.5(7.54)x(6.4/(6.4+10.67)) + 1.4(13.86) = 6.5975+1.413+19.404 =
27.41kNm
Ultimate axial loads:
Internal Column, Pu = 1.4(100.63) + 0.5(54.65) + 1.4(5.67) = 176.15kN
External Column, Pu = 1.4(55.09) + 0.5(54.65/2) + 1.4(39.68) =
146.34kN

Design Pu, Mu:

Internal Column = 176.15, 1.4(40.47) = (176.15, 56.66)
External Column = 146.34, 1.4(27.41) = (146.34, 38.37)

Internal Column:
Assuming 4ksi concrete, 30mm cover, 10 mm hoops and 19mm bars; γ
= 0.7

112
Kn internal col. = Pu/( ϕfc’Ag) = (176.15x103)/(0.8x30x3002) = 0.082
Rn internal col. = Mu/( ϕfc’Agh) = (56.66x106)/(0.8x30x3003) = 0.087

1% < Pg = 1 < 6% : OK
i.e. As, required = 1x3002/100 = 900mm2
Use 4T19 (2 each face) = 1136 > 900mm2 = OK
Use 4T19, 2
External Column: each face
Kn internal col. = Pu/( ϕfc’Ag) = (146.34x103)/(0.8x30x3002) = 0.068
Rn internal col. = Mu/( ϕfc’Agh) = (38.37x106)/(0.8x30x3003) = 0.059

Use T12-
1% < Pg = 1 < 6% : OK 100
i.e. As, required = 1x3002/100 = 900mm2
Use 4T19 (2 each face) = 1136 > 900mm2 = OK

COLUMN HOOPS (j)

Use T12-100 in the confinement zone of 1mfrom the top and bottom
of the column. Use T12-200 outside the confinement zone
accompanied by one closed overall loop enclosing all longitudinal
bars.

SUMMARY OF COLUMN REBAR:

113
INTERNAL COLUMN

INTERNAL AND EXTERNAL COLUMN DESIGN

114
 ENGINEER’S COST ESTIMATE (EX VAT): For Single Bedroom Apartment RC

Alternative 1

CONCRETE:

Slabs = 2x114.45x0.15 = 34.34m3

Beams = [(4.877x5)+(3.658x5)+(3.429x12)]x2x0.55x0.3 = 27.66m3

Columns = 0.3x0.3x[(1.22x15)+(3.2x15)] = 5.967m3

Footings (2.5x2.5x0.3) = 15x2.52x0.3 = 28.125m3

TOTAL = 96.09m3

REBAR:

Slabs at 1 tonne per 12m3 concrete = 68.67/12 = 5.7tonne

Beams 19mm = [(4.877x5)+(3.658x5)+(3.429x12)]x6(bars)x2.24(kg/m)x2(floors)/1000 =

2.3tonnes

Beams 6mm = 4.42x((2x1067/100)+(2134/200))x1.7x2(floors)x0.249)/1000 = 0.12tonnes

Columns 19mm = (no of bars)8x(no of col)15x2.24/1000 = 0.3tonnes

Columns hoops 12mm = 3x2(480/100+ 480/200)x1.3x2x2 + 3x2(480/100+ 480/200)x1.3x2x2 +

12x3(480/100+ 480/200)x1.3x2x2 + 12x3(480/100+ 560/200)x0.8 + 12x(480/100+

560/200)x1.3x2x2 + 12x(480/100+ 560/200)x0.8 = 1.2tonnes

Footings = 31/12 = 2.6tonnes

TOTAL = 12.2tonnes

MASONRY:

115
Consider 400x200x150 ASTM C90 unreinforced hollow concrete units

Nr of blocks = 2x4.42x13.4112/0.4x0.2 = 1481.94m

Mortar = 1481.94x(0.1+0.1+0.4)x0.15x0.012 = 1.6m3

Nr bags of cement = 0.25x1.6x1440/42.5 = 13.55

Sand = 0.75x1.6 = 1.2m3

GRADE SLAB:

Consider 125mm thick and 610 BRC (30.5mx1.8m roll)

i.e. Concrete = 13.4112x8.535x0.125 = 14.31m3

BRC = 13.4112x8.535/30.5x1.8 = 2.08 i.e. 2rolls

Table 29: ENGINEER’S COST ESTIMATE (EX VAT): For Single Bedroom Apartment RC Alternative 1

TIME AMOUNT UNIT RATE (TT$) TOTAL (TT$)

Conc. For superstructure 96 m3 1,380.00 132,604
Rebar 12 Tonne 7,498.00 91,476
Formwork at 25% materials 56,020
Labour at 65% of above 280,100
Blocks 1,482 Nr. 5.75 8,522
Bags of cement for blocks 14 Nr. 53.50 749
Sand for blocks 1 m3 200.00 240
Labour for blocks at 65% 6,026
Grade slab concrete 14 m3 1,380.00 19,748
Grade slab BRC 2 Nr. 449.00 898
Labour for grade slab at 50% 10,323
TOTAL STRUCTURAL 606,705
TOTAL SERVICES 303,352
TOTAL ARCHITECTURAL 1,698,773
TOTAL STR, SERV, ARCH 2,608,829
Preliminaries at 5% 130,441
Contingency at 15% 391,324
CONSTRUCTION COST 3,130,595
OVERHEAD & PROFIT AT 30% 782,649
GRAND TOTAL $ 4,435,010.08

NOTES: Price per ft2 = $3599.85

116
References Calculations Output

SINGLE BEDROOM APARTMENT (2 STOREYS: GROUND AND 2 UNITS

PER BUILDING) STEEL DESIGN ALTERNATIVE 2

SEISMIC LOAD: 1
Total Building Weight (W) = 1817.02kN x 20% to cater for connections
W = 1817.02 x 1.20 = 2180.42kN
Assuming a linear distribution

Seismic Load (V) = 0.1W = 0.1(2180.42) = 218.04kN

SEISMIC
V = F1 + F2
DESIGN
PROCEDURES: F2/ F1 = (1.22 + 3.2)/1.22, F2 = 3.62F1
A MANUAL V=
218.04 = F1 + 3.62F1 = 4.62F1
FOR 218.04kN
PRACTICING F1 = 47.19kN
ENGINEERS
F2 = 170.85kN
(Clarke n.d.)
Check:
47.19 + 170.85 = 218.04kN : OK

MOMENTS DUE TO SEISMIC LOADS: 2

Tributary width assuming equal spans in the short direction
(4.877 + 3.658)/2 = 4.268m
2 x (0.5 x 4.268) = 4.268m

∑ 𝐹𝑖=2,n = 170.85kN
∑ 𝐹𝑖=1,n = 218.04kN

MAC = (170.85x3.2)/(2(1)) = 273.36kN (INT.) /2 = 136.68kN (EXT.)

MAD = (218.04x1.22)/(2(1)) = 133kN (INT.) /2 = 66.5kN (EXT.)
MAB = MAE = (136.68 + 133)/2 = 134.84kN (INT.) /2 = 67.42kN (EXT.)

117
 Summary ME for 2 frames (3-1) divided by 2

COLUMN AXIAL LOADS DUE TO SEISMIC FORCES: 3

Overturning Moment (Mo) = [𝐹1 (𝑑1) + 𝐹2 (𝑑1+𝑑2)] / No. of frames
Mo = [(40.12x1.22) + (145.22x(1.22+3.2))] / 3-1 = 345.41kNm
PE = Mo/L = 345.41 x 2/(2x3.429) = 100.73kN

GRAVITY MOMENTS IN BEAMS: 4

WD = 2.5 x (4.268/2) x (4.268/2) = 11.38kN
WL = 11.38 x (1.2/2.5) = 5.46kN

(Janicki 2009-
2021)
i.e. MD, SUPPORT = -0.167x2x4.268x11.38 = -16.22kNm
MD, SPAN = 0.111x2x4.268x11.38 = 10.78kNm
ML, SUPPORT = -0.167x2x4.268x5.46 = -7.78kNm
ML, SPAN = 0.111x2x4.268x5.46 = 5.17kNm

GRAVITY MOMENTS IN COLUMNS: 5

Dead load = 2.5kN/m2 x 4.268 = 10.67kN/m
Live Load = 1.5kN/m2 x 4.268 = 6.4kN/m
Total out-of-balance FEM = (DL x trib. area2)/12 – ((DL+LL) x trib.
area2)/12
FEM = (10.67x4.2682)/12 – ((10.67+6.4) x 4.2682)/12 =16.20 - 26 = -
9.8kNm

Mupper/lower = FEM x 60% OR 35%

Mupper = 9.8x0.6 = 5.88kNm
Mlower = 9.8x0.35 = 3.43kNm

118
 GRAVITY AXIAL FORCES IN COLUMNS: 6
Dead = 3x2.5x4.2682 /2 = 136.62kN
Live = 136.62x(1.5/2.5) = 81.97kN

BEAM SIZE: 7
Consider U = 1.4D+0.5L+1.4E
Mu = (1.4x16.22) + (0.5x7.78) + (1.4x67.42) = 120.99kNm
For ASTM A992 Grade 50
Zreq>M/0.9Fy: Fy=345Mpa
Zrequired = 120.99x106/(0.9x345x103) = 389.65cm3 (23.78in3)
Use W10x45 (54.9>23.78in3 : OK)
(Structural drafting steel sections 2006-2021)

CHECK BEAM LOCAL BUCKLING INT=STABILITY (i.e. SEISMIC

(Structural
drafting steel COMPACTNESS): 8
sections 2006-
b/2tf = 6.5 ; λmax = 0.3(E/Fy) = 0.3√(29000/50) = 7.22>6.5 :OK
2021)
h/w = 22.5 ; λmax = 2.45(E/Fy) = 2.45√(29000/50) = 59>22.5 :OK

CHECK UNBRACED LENGTH OF BEAM FLANGES: 9

Max length = 0.086ryE/Fy = 0.086x2.01x29000/50 = 100.26in =
2546.60mm
Unbraced length = 4268/2 = 2134 < 2546.604mm : OK
Use W10x45

COLUMN SIZE FOR STRONG-COLUMN-WEAK BEAM (SCWB): 10

Use
Beam plastic moment strength, Mp = FyZ = 50x54.9/12= 228.75kip-ft W10x45 for
Beam depth = 10.1in beams
Assume location of beam plastic hinge is 1.6 times beam total depth
from the column center-line, ie.x=1.6db
i.e. Shear force in plastic hinge, Vp = 2Mp/(L-2x) + w(L-2x)/2 =
(2x228.75)/(4.268x3.28-2(1.6x10.10/2)) +

119
 (1.2(10.67+6.4))x0.74x(4.268x3.28-(1.6x10.10/2))/2 = 126.15kip
(561.14kN)
Moment due to Vp ( i.e. Mv) = 126.15x1.6x10.10 /12 = 169.68kip-ft
∑Mpb* = ∑ (1.1RyMp + Mv)
Ry = 1.1 for ASTM A992M
∑Mpb* = 1.1x1.1x228.75 + 169.68 = 446.47kip-ft
∑Mpc* = ∑ (ZcFyc) = 2Zcx50 = 1.5x446.47x12 : Zc (Zx) = 80.36in3
Use W14x82 (139 > 80.36in3 : OK)
Use
W14x82 for
CHECK COLUMN LOCAL BUCKLING: 11
columns
b/2tf = 5.9 ; λmax = 0.3(E/Fy) = 0.3√(29000/50) = 7.22>5.9 :OK
h/w = 22.4 ; λmax = 2.45(E/Fy) = 2.45√(29000/50) = 59>22.4 :OK

CHECK DRIFT: 12
For beam and column sizes selected
Beams: W10x45, Ix=248 in4 Columns: W14x82, Ix=881 in4
Ib = Ib*=Ib*/L* = ∑Ib/L = (248x0.02544)/4.268 = 2.42x10-5

SEISMIC Ic = Ic* = ∑Ic/h = (2x881x0.02544)/1.22 = 6.01x10-4

DESIGN Stiffness ratio, VG = (Ib*/L*)/( Ic*/h) = 2.42/60.1 = 0.0403 i.e. εG ≅ 1.4
PROCEDURES:
A MANUAL Drift = ∆Ug/hg = Cd(3 εG-1)(∑F)hG2 /(12EIc)
FOR Cd(3 εG-1)(∑F)hG2 / 12EIc = [5.5(3x1.4-1)1.222 /
PRACTICING
(12x210x106x(882x0.02544))]x (0.1x1853.36/2)x100% = (26.19584 /
ENGINEERS
(Clarke n.d.) 925132.6159) x 92.668(100) = 0.26%<2% :OK
Fig 9.2

CHECK UNIT EQUATION (COLUMN STRENGTH): 13

Consider U = 1.4D+0.5L+1.4E
Pu = (1.4x136.62) + (0.5x81.97) + (1.4x100.73) = 373.28kN
λc = 1.1L√(Fy/E)/(π ry)
λc = 1.1x1.22x3.28x12√(50/29000)/(3.14x2.48) = 0.786 : Y=0.6178
Fcr = 0.658Y x Fy = 0.6580.0576 x 50 = 38.61ksi
φPn = 0.8 Fcr A = 0.8x38.61x24 = 741.26kip = 2297.29kN
Pu/ φPn = 373.28/2297.29 = 0.21 > 0.2

120
P/ 2φPn + 8/9[ (Mz/ 0.8Mnz) + (My/ 0.8Mny) ]
Muz = 0.5x3.43 + 1.4x66.5 = 94.82kNm
= 0.21/2 + (8x94.82)/(9x0.8x1.35x457.5 2Mp step 10) = 0.28 < 1 : OK

NON-SEISMIC BEAMS: 14
Consider U = 1.2D+1.6L
Mu = 1.2x16.22 + 1.6x7.78 = 31.91kNm
Zrequired = 31.91x106/(0.9x345x103) = 102.77cm3 (6.27in3)
Use W10x12 (12.6>6.27in3 : OK)

NON-SEISMIC COLUMS: 15
Consider U = 1.2D+1.6L
Max moment on internal column, Mu = 1.6x2x3.43 = 10.98kNm
step 5
Max axial force on internal column, Pu = 1.2x2x136.62 + 1.6x2x81.97 =
590.19kN step 6
Effective height = 0.85x1220 = 1037mm = 3.402ft

121
 ENGINEER’S COST ESTIMATE (EX VAT): For Single Bedroom Apartment Steel

Alternative 2

CONCRETE:

Concrete for decking for 125mm equivalent thickness = 2x8.534x13.4112x0.125 = 28.61m3

Footings (2.5x2.5x0.3) = 15x2.52x0.3 = 28.125m3

TOTAL = 56.74m3

STEELWORK:

Seismic beams = 10x3.429x3.28x45x0.46= 2328kg

Seismic columns = 4x4.42x3.28x82x0.46= 2187kg

Non-seismic beams = 10x2x3.429x3.28x12x0.46= 1242kg

Non-seismic columns = 2x4.42x3.28x99x0.46= 1320kg

Composite beams = 16x2x3.429x3.28x12x0.46= 1986.69kg

TOTAL = 9064kg

122
Composite decking, Composite decking, 20ft long x 25’’ wide = 2x(13.4112x12/25)x8.534x3.28=

360.38ft

Decking BRC, 610x6ftx100ft=2x13.4112x8.534/(30.5x1.8)= 5 rolls

Table 30: ENGINEER’S COST ESTIMATE (EX VAT): For Single Bedroom Apartment Steel Alternative 2

TIME AMOUNT UNIT RATE (TT$) TOTAL (TT$)

Conc. For Decking 57 m3 1,380.00 78,301
Decking 360 ft 22.00 7,928
BRC Decking 5 Nr. Rolls 598.20 2,991
Steelwork 9,064 kg 21.10 191,250
Accessories at 25% 47,813
Blocks (inc mortar) 9,271
Labour for blocks at 65% 6,026
Grade slab 9,017
TOTAL STRUCTURAL 352,597
TOTAL SERVICES 176,298
TOTAL ARCHITECTURAL 987,271
TOTAL STR, SERV, ARCH 1,516,166
Preliminaries at 5% 75,808
Contingency at 15% 227,425
CONSTRUCTION COST 1,819,399
OVERHEAD & PROFIT AT 30% 454,850
GRAND TOTAL $ 2,577,481.95

NOTES: Price per ft2 = $2092.11

123
References Calculations Output

LARGE HOUSE (3 STOREYS) RC DESIGN ALTERNATIVE 1

SEISMIC
DESIGN Beam sizing b = 300mm
PROCEDURES: Span <6000mm d = 550mm
A MANUAL
FOR d(mm) = span(mm)/26 + 350 = 537.58mm i.e. to the nearest 25mm =
PRACTICING 550mm
ENGINEERS
(Clarke n.d.) b(mm) = 300mm
Column sizing
Span <6000mm
h = 300mm

Building Weight Calculation

(SBC PCTTS
599: 20XX Pg.
101) Floor Slab Weight

(Standards Area = 167.23m2

2020) Conc. Density = 2400N/m3
Thickness = 0.15m
Weight of Single slab = 167.23 x 24 x 0.15 = 602.03kN
Total Slab Weight = 3 Slabs = 1806.08kN

Beam Weight
Max Span = 4.115m

124
No. of Beams = 31
No. of Floors = 3
Total Beam Weight = 24x0.55x0.3x3x4.115x31 = 1515.47kN

Column Weight
For 1st and 2nd floors:
Max Beam Span = 4.115m
No. of Columns = 20
Column height = 3.2m
h = 0.3m on both ends
No. of Floors = 2
1st and 2nd floor Column Weight = 24x20x3.2x0.32x2 = 276.48kN
For ground floor:
No. of Columns = 20
Column height = 1.22m
No. of Floors = 1
Ground floor column weight = 24x20x1.22x0.32x1 = 52.70kN
Total Column Weight = 276.48 + 52.7 = 329.18kN

Total Building Weight (W) = 1806.08 + 1515.47 + 329.18 = 3650.73kN

VERTICAL DISTRIUTION OF SEISMIC LOAD (a)

Assuming a linear distribution

125
 V=
365.07kN

Seismic Load (V) = 0.1W = 0.1(3650.73) = 365.07kN

V = F1 + F2 + F3
F2/ F1 = (1.22 + 3.2)/1.22, F2 = 3.62F1
F3/F2 = (1.22+3.2+3.2)/(1.22+3.2), F3 = 1.72F2
F1 + F2 + F3 = F1 + 3.62F1 + (1.72x3.62)F1 = 10.85F1 = 365.07kN
F1 = 33.65kN
F2 = 121.8kN
F3 = 209.5kN
Check:
33.65 + 121.8 + 209.5 = 364.95kN : OK

MOMENTS DUE TO SEISMIC LOAD (b)

Tributary width assuming equal spans in the short direction
(4.115 + 4.115)/2 = 4.115m
2 x (0.5 x 4.115) = 4.115m

∑ Fi=3,n = 209.5kN
∑ 𝐹𝑖=2,n = 331.3kN
∑ 𝐹𝑖=1,n = 364.95kN

MAC = (331.3x3.2)/(2(4-1)) = 176.69kN (INT.) 176.69/2 = 88.35kN

(EXT.)
MAD = (364.95x1.22)/(2(4-1)) = 74.21kN (INT.) 74.21/2 = 37.1kN (EXT.)
MAB = MAE = (176.69 + 74.21)/2 = 125.45kN (INT.) 125.45/2 = 62.73kN
(EXT.)

126
Summary ME for 2 frames (4-1) divided by 3

∑ Fi=3,n = 209.5kN
∑ 𝐹𝑖=2,n = 331.3kN
∑ 𝐹𝑖=1,n = 364.95kN

MAC = (331.3x3.2)/(2(5-1)) = 132.52kN (INT.) 132.52/2 = 66.26kN

(EXT.)
MAD = (364.95x1.22)/(2(5-1)) = 55.65kN (INT.) 55.65/2 = 27.83kN
(EXT.)
MAB = MAE = (132.52 + 55.65)/2 = 94.09kN (INT.) 94.09/2 = 47.04kN
(EXT.)

127
Summary ME for 4 frames (5-1) divided by 4

COLUMN AXIAL LOADS DUE TO SEISMIC FORCES (shorter direction)

(c)

Overturning Moment (Mo) = [𝐹1 (𝑑1) + 𝐹2 (𝑑1+𝑑2)] / No. of frames

Mo = [(33.65x1.22) + (121.8x(1.22+3.2) + (209.5x(1.22+3.2+3.2))] / 4-1
= 725.27kNm

PA = PD & PB = PC
TMA Centre-line
PC/2.058 = (PD-PC)/4.115, PC = PD/3
PD = Mo/12.345 i.e. PD = 725.27/12.345

128
PD = 58.75kNm = PA
PC = 58.75/3 = 19.58kNm = PB

GRAVITY MOMENTS IN BEAMS (d)

Live Load = 1.5kN/m2 x 4.115 = 6.17kN/m
Dead Load = 2.5kN/m2 x 4.115 = 10.29kN/m

For equal spans, for unit UDL of 1kN/m

MG, SUPPORT = -FL/10 = -4.1152/10 = -1.69kNm

MG, SPAN = 0.08FL = 0.08(4.2732) = 1.35kNm
MD, SUPPORT = -10.29(1.69) = -17.39kNm
MD, SPAN = 10.29(1.35) = 13.89kNm
ML, SUPPORT = -6.17(1.69) = -10.43kNm
ML, SPAN = 6.17(1.35) = 8.33kNm

GRAVITY MOMENT IN COLUMNS (e)

By moment distribution of sub frames

Internal Column

Beam Depth = 4.115/26 + 350 = 550mm

Use beam width of 300mm
Assume column size is 300x300mm

Beams 550x300 I = bd3/12 = 300x5503/12 = 4.2x109mm4

Columns = 300x300 I = 3004/12 = 6.8x108mm4
Kb = I/L = (4.2x109)/4115 = 10.2x105mm3; KU = (6.8x108)/3200 =
2.1x105mm3
KL = (6.8x108)/1220 = 5.57x105mm3
Total out-of-balance FEM = (DL x trib. area2)/12 – ((DL+LL) x trib.
area2)/12

129
FEM = (10.29x4.1152)/12 – ((10.29+6.17) x 4.1152)/12 = 14.52 – 23.23
= -8.71kNm

Mupper/lower = FEM x [(KU or KL) / (Kb + KU + KL)]

Mupper = 8.71x[2.1 / (10.2+2.1+5.57)] = 1.02kNm
Mlower = 8.71x[5.57 / (10.2+2.1+5.57)] = 2.71kNm
External Column
Total out-of-balance FEM = (DL x trib. area2)/12
FEM = (10.29x4.1152)/12 =14.52kNm

Mupper/lower = FEM x [(KU or KL) / (0.5Kb + KU + KL)]

Mupper = 14.52x[2.1 / (0.5(10.2)+2.1+5.57)] = 2.39kNm
Mlower = 14.52x[5.57 / (0.5(10.2)+2.1+5.57)] = 6.33kNm

GRAVITY AXIAL FORCES IN COLUMNS (f)

By tributary area

Dead = (2.5x4.1152x3) + (7.62x0.32) + (7.62x0.32x24) = 127 + 0.6858 +

16.46 = 144.14kN
Live = 1.5x4.1152x3 = 76.2kNm
External Column Dead = 127/2 + 16.46 = 79.96kN

BEAM MOMENT (LONG) REBAR (g)

Ultimate Moment (Mu)
At supports U = 1.4D + 0.5L + 1.4E
Near mid-span, consider U = 1.4D + 1.6L

Internal support (top) Mu = 1.4(17.39) + 0.5(10.43) + 1.4(41.82) =

88.11kNm
External support (top) Mu = 1.4(17.39) + 0.5(10.43) + 1.4(20.91) =
58.84kNm
Span (bottom) Mu = 1.4(13.89) + 1.6(8.33) = 32.77kNm

130
Internal support rebar d = 550mm, b = 300mm
Mu = 0.9Asfy x (d-a/2) where a = Asfy/(0.85fc’b)
For internal
fc’ = 30MPa, fy = 410MPa
support
a = (As x 410) / (0.85x30x300) = 0.054As use
2#19bars

88.1 = 0.9As410 x (550-(0.054As/2)) For

external
88.1 = 369As x (550x10-6- 0.027x10-6As)
support
88.1 = 0.20295As – 9.963x10-6As2 use
2#19bars
As = 443.76mm2
i.e. use 2#19bars = 284x2 = 568mm2 > 443.76mm2 : OK For span
rebar use
1#19bars
External support rebar
58.84 = 0.20295As – 9.963x10-6As2
As = 294.17mm2
i.e. use 2#19bars = 284x2 = 568mm2 > 294.17mm2 : OK

Span rebar
32.77 = 0.20295As – 9.963x10-6As2
As = 162.77mm2
i.e. use 1#19bars = 284x1 = 284mm2 > 162.77mm2 : OK

SUMMARY OF BEAM LONG REBAR:

131
(SBC PCTTS
599: 20XX
Table 4-7
Recommende
d concrete
cover Pg. 69)
Assume cover = 30mm
BEAM TRANSVERSE (SHEAR HOOP) REBAR (h)
w = 1.2 (D + L) = 1.2 (6.17+10.29) = 19.75kN/m
Mpr1 = As x 1.25fy(d -a/2) = 568 x 1.25 x 410 (550 – (0.054x568)/2) x
10-6 = 155.6kNm
Mpr2 = As x 1.25fy(d -a/2) = 568 x 1.25 x 410 (550 – (0.054x568)/2) x
10-6 = 155.6kNm
Shear force in hinge, V = 0.75wL/2 +/- (Mpr1+Mpr2)/L
V = (0.75x19.75x4.115)/2 + (155.6+155.6)/4.115 = 106.1kN
Consider HTS hoops fyv = 410MPa
Av/s = V/fyvd = (106.1x103)/(410x550) = 0.47mm
For a spacing, s = 100mm, Av = 100x0.47 = 47mm2
Use 2T6 Av = 2x32 = 64 > 47mm2 : OK

SUMMARY OF BEAM TRANSVERSE REBAR:

132
 COLUMN MOMENT REBAR (i)
300x300
Consider load case, U = 1.4D + 0.5L + 1.4E
Ultimate moments:
Internal Column, Mu = 0 + 0.5(2.71) + 1.4(24.74) = 35.72kN
External Column, Mu = 1.4(6.33)x(10.29/(10.29+6.17)) +
0.5(6.33)x(6.17/(6.17+10.29)) + 1.4(12.36) = 5.54+1.19+17.3 =
24.03kNm
Ultimate axial loads:
Internal Column, Pu = 1.4(144.14) + 0.5(76.2) + 1.4(19.58) = 267.31kN
ACI 318 SIC
(ACI R4-60.7) External Column, Pu = 1.4(79.96) + 0.5(76.2/2) + 1.4(58.75) =
Pg. 30
213.24kN

Design Pu, Mu:

Internal Column = 267.31, 1.4(35.72) = (267.31, 50.01)
External Column = 213.24, 1.4(24.03) = (213.24, 33.64)

Internal Column:
ACI 318 SIC
(ACI R4-60.7)
Pg. 30

133
Assuming 4ksi concrete, 30mm cover, 10 mm hoops and 19mm bars; γ
= 0.7
Kn internal col. = Pu/( ϕfc’Ag) = (267.31x103)/(0.8x30x3002) = 0.124
Use 4T19
Rn internal col. = Mu/( ϕfc’Agh) = (50.01x106)/(0.8x30x3003) = 0.077
bars, 2
each side
1% < Pg = 1 < 6% : OK
i.e. As, required = 1x3002/100 = 900mm2
Use 4T19 = 1136 > 900mm2 = OK
External Column: Use T12-
200
Kn internal col. = Pu/( ϕfc’Ag) = (213.24x103)/(0.8x30x3002) = 0.099
Rn internal col. = Mu/( ϕfc’Agh) = (33.64x106)/(0.8x30x3003) = 0.052

1% < Pg = 1 < 6% : OK
i.e. As, required = 1x3002/100 = 900mm2
Use 4T19 = 1136 > 900mm2 = OK

COLUMN HOOPS (j)

Use T12-100 in the confinement zone of 1mfrom the top and bottom
of the column. Use T12-200 outside the confinement zone
accompanied by one closed overall loop enclosing all longitudinal
bars.

SUMMARY OF COLUMN REBAR:

134
INTERNAL COLUMN

INTERNAL AND EXTERNAL COLUMN DESIGN

135
 ENGINEER’S COST ESTIMATE (EX VAT): For Large House RC Alternative 1

CONCRETE:

Slabs = 3x173.08x0.15 = 77.88m3

Beams = [(4.115x15)+(3.505x16)]x3x0.55x0.3 = 58.31m3

Columns = 0.3x0.3x[(1.22x20)+(3.2x40)] = 13.72m3

Footings (2.5x2.5x0.3) = 20x2.52x0.3 = 37.5m3

TOTAL = 187.41m3

REBAR:

Slabs at 1 tonne per 12m3 concrete = 77.88/12 = 6.49tonne

Beams 19mm = [(4.115x15)+(3.505x16)]x6(bars)x2.24(kg/m)x3(floors)/1000 = 4.7tonnes

Beams 6mm = 7.62x((2x1029/100)+(2058/200))x1.7x3(floors)x0.249)/1000 = 0.29tonnes

Columns 19mm = (no of bars)8x(no of col)20x2.24/1000 = 0.4tonnes

Columns hoops 12mm = 3x2(480/100+ 480/200)x1.3x2x2 + 3x2(480/100+ 480/200)x1.3x2x2 +

12x3(480/100+ 480/200)x1.3x2x2 + 12x3(480/100+ 560/200)x0.8 + 12x(480/100+

560/200)x1.3x2x2 + 12x(480/100+ 560/200)x0.8 = 1.2tonnes

Footings = 31/12 = 2.6tonnes

TOTAL = 15.68tonnes

MASONRY:

Consider 400x200x150 ASTM C90 unreinforced hollow concrete units

Nr of blocks = 3x7.62x13.716/0.4x0.2 = 3919m

136
Mortar = 3919x(0.1+0.1+0.4)x0.15x0.012 = 4.23m3

Nr bags of cement = 0.25x4.23x1440/42.5 = 36

Sand = 0.75x36 = 27m3

GRADE SLAB:

Consider 125mm thick and 610 BRC (30.5mx1.8m roll)

i.e. Concrete = 13.716x12.92x0.125 = 22.15m3

BRC = 13.716x12.92/30.5x1.8 = 3.23 i.e. 4rolls

Table 31: ENGINEER’S COST ESTIMATE (EX VAT): For Large House RC Alternative 1

TIME AMOUNT UNIT RATE (TT$) TOTAL (TT$)

Conc. For superstructure 187 m3 1,380.00 258,626
Rebar 16 Tonne 7,498.00 117,569
Formwork at 25% materials 94,049
Labour at 65% of above 470,243
Blocks 3,919 Nr. 5.75 22,534
Bags of cement for blocks 36 Nr. 53.50 1,926
Sand for blocks 27 m3 200.00 5,400
Labour for blocks at 65% 15,899
Grade slab concrete 22 m3 1,380.00 30,567
Grade slab BRC 3 Nr. 449.00 1,450
Labour for grade slab at 50% 16,009
TOTAL STRUCTURAL 1,034,271
TOTAL SERVICES 517,136
TOTAL ARCHITECTURAL 2,895,960
TOTAL STR, SERV, ARCH 4,447,367
Preliminaries at 5% 222,368
Contingency at 15% 667,105
CONSTRUCTION COST 5,336,841
OVERHEAD & PROFIT AT 30% 1,334,210
GRAND TOTAL $ 7,560,524.06

NOTES: Price per ft2 = $4200.29

137
References Calculations Output

LARGE HOUSE (3 STOREYS: GROUND AND 2 ADDITIONAL STORIES)

STEEL DESIGN ALTERNATIVE 2

SEISMIC LOAD: 1
Total Building Weight (W) = 3650.73kN x 20% to cater for connections
W = 3650.73 x 1.20 = 4380.88kN
Assuming a linear distribution

Seismic Load (V) = 0.1W = 0.1(4380.88) = 438.09kN

V = F1 + F2 + F3
F2/ F1 = (1.22 + 3.2)/1.22, F2 = 3.62F1
F3/F2 = (1.22+3.2+3.2)/(1.22+3.2), F3 = 1.72F2
F1 + F2 + F3 = F1 + 3.62F1 + (1.72x3.62)F1 = 10.85F1 = 365.07kN
F1 = 40.38kN
F2 = 146.16kN
F3 = 251.4kN
Check:
40.38 + 146.16 + 251.4 = 437.94kN : OK

MOMENTS DUE TO SEISMIC LOADS: 2

Tributary width assuming equal spans in the short direction
(4.115 + 4.115)/2 = 4.115m
2 x (0.5 x 4.115) = 4.115m

∑ Fi=3,n = 251.4kN
∑ 𝐹𝑖=2,n = 397.56kN
∑ 𝐹𝑖=1,n = 437.94kN

MAC = (397.56x3.2)/(2(1)) = 636.1kN (INT.) /2 = 318.05kN (EXT.)

138
 MAD = (437.94x1.22)/(2(1)) = 267.14kN (INT.) /2 = 133.57kN (EXT.)
MAB = MAE = (267.14 + 636.1)/2 = 903.24kN (INT.) /2 = 451.62kN
(EXT.)

Summary ME for 2 frames (3-1) divided by 2

COLUMN AXIAL LOADS DUE TO SEISMIC FORCES: 3

Overturning Moment (Mo) = [𝐹1 (𝑑1) + 𝐹2 (𝑑1+𝑑2)] / No. of frames
Mo = [(40.38x1.22) + (146.16x(1.22+3.2)) + (251.4x(1.22+3.2+3.2))] / 3
= 870.32kNm
PE = Mo/L = 870.32 x 3/(2x4.115) = 317.25kN

GRAVITY MOMENTS IN BEAMS: 4

WD = 2.5 x (4.115/2) x (4.115/2) = 11.58kN
WL = 11.58 x (1.2/2.5) = 5.08kN

(Janicki 2009-
2021)

i.e. MD, SUPPORT = -0.133x2x4.115x11.58 = -12.68kNm

MD, SPAN = 0.122x2x4.115x11.58 = 11.63kNm
ML, SUPPORT = -0.133x2x4.115x5.08 = -5.56kNm
ML, SPAN = 0.122x2x4.115x5.08 = 5.1kNm

GRAVITY MOMENTS IN COLUMNS: 5

Dead load = 2.5kN/m2 x 4.115 = 10.29kN/m
Live Load = 1.5kN/m2 x 4.115 = 6.17kN/m
Total out-of-balance FEM = (DL x trib. area2)/12 – ((DL+LL) x trib.
area2)/12

139
 FEM = (10.29x4.1152)/12 – ((10.29+6.17) x 4.1152)/12 =14.52 – 23.23 =
-8.71kNm

Mupper/lower = FEM x 60% OR 35%

Mupper = 8.71x0.6 = 5.23kNm
Mlower = 8.71x0.35 = 3.05kNm

GRAVITY AXIAL FORCES IN COLUMNS: 6

Dead = 4x2.5x4.1152 /2 = 84.67kN
Live = 84.67x(1.5/2.5) = 50.8kN

BEAM SIZE: 7
Consider U = 1.4D+0.5L+1.4E
Mu = (1.4x12.68) + (0.5x5.56) + (1.4x451.62) = 652.8kNm
For ASTM A992 Grade 50
Zreq>M/0.9Fy: Fy=345Mpa
Zrequired = 652.8x106/(0.9x345) = 2102.42cm3 (128.3in3)
Use W12x96 (147>128.3in3 : OK)
(Structural
drafting steel
CHECK BEAM LOCAL BUCKLING INT=STABILITY (i.e. SEISMIC
sections 2006-
2021) COMPACTNESS): 8
b/2tf = 6.8 ; λmax = 0.3(E/Fy) = 0.3√(29000/50) = 7.22>6.8 :OK
h/w = 17.7 ; λmax = 2.45(E/Fy) = 2.45√(29000/50) = 59>17.7 :OK

CHECK UNBRACED LENGTH OF BEAM FLANGES: 9

Max length = 0.086ryE/Fy = 0.086x3.09x29000/50 = 154.13in =
3914.9mm
Unbraced length = 4115/2 = 2057.5 < 3914.9mm :OK
Use W12x96
COLUMN SIZE FOR STRONG-COLUMN-WEAK BEAM (SCWB): 10
Beam plastic moment strength, Mp = FyZ = 50x147/12= 612.5kip-ft
Beam depth = 12.71in

140
 Assume location of beam plastic hinge is 1.6 times beam total depth
from the column center-line, ie.x=1.6db
i.e. Shear force in plastic hinge, Vp = 2Mp/(L-2x) + w(L-2x)/2 =
(2x612.5)/(4.115x3.28-2(1.6x12.71/2)) +
(1.2(10.29+6.17))x0.74x(4.115x3.28-(1.6x12.71/2))/2 = 195.06kip
(867.6kN)
Moment due to Vp ( i.e. Mv) = 195.06x1.6x12.71 /12 = 330.56kip-ft
∑Mpb* = ∑ (1.1RyMp + Mv)
Ry = 1.1 for ASTM A992M
∑Mpb* = 1.1x1.1x612.5 + 330.56 = 1071.69kip-ft
∑Mpc* = ∑ (ZcFyc) = 2Zcx50 = 1.5x1071.69x12 : Zc = 192.9in3
Use W12x136 (214 > 192.9in3 : OK)

CHECK COLUMN LOCAL BUCKLING: 11

b/2tf = 5 ; λmax = 0.3(E/Fy) = 0.3√(29000/50) = 7.22>5 :OK
h/w = 12.3 ; λmax = 2.45(E/Fy) = 2.45√(29000/50) = 59>12.3 :OK

CHECK DRIFT: 12
For beam and column sizes selected
Beams: W12x96, Ix=833 in4 Columns: W12x136, Ix=1240 in4
Ib = Ib*=Ib*/L* = ∑Ib/L = (833x0.02544)/4.115 = 8.43x10-5
Ic = Ic* = ∑Ic/h = (2x1240x0.02544)/1.22 = 8.46x10-4
SEISMIC Stiffness ratio, VG = (Ib*/L*)/( Ic*/h) = 8.43/84.6 = 0.1 i.e. εG ≅ 1.4
DESIGN
PROCEDURES: Drift = ∆Ug/hg = Cd(3 εG-1)(∑F)hG2 /(12EIc)
A MANUAL Cd(3 εG-1)(∑F)hG2 / 12EIc = [5.5(3x1.4-1)1.222 /
FOR
PRACTICING (12x210x106x(1240x0.02544))]x (0.1x4380.88/2)x100% = (26.19584 /
ENGINEERS 1300639.959) x 219.044(100) = 0.44%<2% :OK
(Clarke n.d.)
Fig 9.2
CHECK UNIT EQUATION (COLUMN STRENGTH): 13
Consider U = 1.4D+0.5L+1.4E
Pu = (1.4x84.67) + (0.5x50.8) + (1.4x317.25) = 588.09kN
λc = 1.1L√(Fy/E)/(π ry)

141
λc = 1.1x1.22x3.28x12√(50/29000)/(3.14x3.16) = 0.696 : Y=0.4844
Fcr = 0.658Y x Fy = 0.6580.4844 x 50 = 40.82ksi
φPn = 0.8 Fcr A = 0.8x40.82x39.9 = 803.11kip = 3572.41kN
Pu/ φPn = 588.09/3572.4 = 0.16≈0.2≥0.2
P/ 2φPn + 8/9[ (Mz/ 0.8Mnz) + (My/ 0.8Mny) ]
Muz = 0.5x3.05 + 1.4x133.57 = 188.52kNm
= 0.21/2 + (8x188.52)/(9x0.8x1.35x1225Mp step 10) = 0.23 < 1 : OK

NON-SEISMIC BEAMS: 14
Consider U = 1.2D+1.6L
Mu = 1.2x12.68 + 1.6x5.56 = 24.11kNm
Zrequired = 24.11x106/(0.9x345x103) = 77.66cm3 (4.74in3)
Use W10x12 (12.6>4.74in3 : OK)

NON-SEISMIC COLUMS: 15
Consider U = 1.2D+1.6L
Max moment on internal column, Mu = 1.6x2x3.05 = 9.76kNm
Max axial force on internal column, Pu = 1.2x2x84.67+ 1.6x2x50.8 =
365.77kN
Effective height = 0.85x1220 = 1037mm = 3.402ft

142
 ENGINEER’S COST ESTIMATE (EX VAT): For Large House Steel Alternative 2

CONCRETE:

Concrete for decking for 125mm equivalent thickness = 3x12.192x13.716x0.125 = 62.71m3

Footings (2.5x2.5x0.3) = 20x2.52x0.3 = 37.5m3

TOTAL = 100.21m3

STEELWORK:

Seismic beams = 15x3.505x3.28x96x0.46= 7615kg

Seismic columns = 8x7.62x3.28x136x0.46= 12509kg

Non-seismic beams = 15x3x4.115x3.28x12x0.46= 3353kg

Non-seismic columns = 8x7.62x3.28x99x0.46= 9106kg

Composite beams = 24x3x4.115x3.28x12x0.46= 5364kg

143
TOTAL = 37947kg

Composite decking, Composite decking, 20ft long x 25’’ wide =

3x(13.716x12/25)x12.192x3.28= 789.84ft

Decking BRC, 610x6ftx100ft=3x13.716x12.192/(30.5x1.8)= 10 rolls

Table 32: ENGINEER’S COST ESTIMATE (EX VAT): For Large House Steel Alternative 2

TIME AMOUNT UNIT RATE (TT$) TOTAL (TT$)

Conc. For Decking 100 m3 1,380.00 138,290
Decking 790 ft 22.00 17,376
BRC Decking 10 Nr. Rolls 598.20 5,982
Steelwork 37,947 kg 21.10 800,682
Accessories at 25% 200,170
Blocks (inc mortar) 211,617
Labour for blocks at 65% 137,551
Grade slab 143,533
TOTAL STRUCTURAL 1,655,202
TOTAL SERVICES 827,601
TOTAL ARCHITECTURAL 4,634,566
TOTAL STR, SERV, ARCH 7,117,369
Preliminaries at 5% 355,868
Contingency at 15% 1,067,605
CONSTRUCTION COST 8,540,843
OVERHEAD & PROFIT AT 30% 2,135,211
GRAND TOTAL $ 12,099,527.20

NOTES: Price per ft2 = $6721.96

144
References Calculations Output

COMMUNITY CENTRE AND NURSERY (3 STOREYS) RC DESIGN

ALTERNATIVE 1

SEISMIC b = 300mm
Beam sizing
DESIGN d = 550mm
PROCEDURES: Span <6000mm
A MANUAL
d(mm) = span(mm)/26 + 350 = 527mm i.e. to the nearest 25mm =
FOR
PRACTICING 550mm
ENGINEERS
b(mm) = 300mm
(Clarke n.d.)
Column sizing
Span <6000mm
h = 300mm

Building Weight Calculation

(SBC PCTTS
599: 20XX Pg.
101) Floor Slab Weight
Area = 371.24m2
(Standards
2020) Conc. Density = 2400N/m3
Thickness = 0.15m (SBC PCTTS 599: 20XX Pg. 101)
Weight of Single slab = 371.24 x 24 x 0.15 = 1336.46kN
Total Slab Weight = 3 Slabs = 4009.39kN

145
Beam Weight
Max Span = 4.602m
No. of Beams = 49
No. of Floors = 3
Total Beam Weight = 24x0.55x0.3x3x4.602x49 = 2678.92kN

Column Weight
For 1st and 2nd floors:
Max Beam Span = 4.602m
No. of Columns = 30
Column height = 3.2m
h = 0.3m on both ends
No. of Floors = 2
1st and 2nd floor Column Weight = 24x30x3.2x0.32x2 = 414.72kN
For ground floor:
No. of Columns = 30
Column height = 1.22m
No. of Floors = 1
Ground floor column weight = 24x30x1.22x0.32x1 = 79.06kN
Total Column Weight = 414.72 + 79.06 = 493.78kN

Total Building Weight (W) = 4009.39 + 2678.92 + 493.78 = 7182.09kN

VERTICAL DISTRIUTION OF SEISMIC LOAD (a)

Assuming a linear distribution

146
 V=
718.21kN

Seismic Load (V) = 0.1W = 0.1(7182.09) = 718.21kN

V = F1 + F2 + F3
F2/ F1 = (1.22 + 3.2)/1.22, F2 = 3.62F1
F3/F2 = (1.22+3.2+3.2)/(1.22+3.2), F3 = 1.72F2
F1 + F2 + F3 = F1 + 3.62F1 + (1.72x3.62)F1 = 10.85F1 = 718.21kN
F1 = 66.19kN
F2 = 239.62kN
F3 = 412.15kN
Check:
66.19 + 239.62 + 412.15 = 717.96kN : OK

MOMENTS DUE TO SEISMIC LOAD (b)

Tributary width assuming equal spans in the short direction

(4.191 + 4.1911)/2 = 4.191m

2 x (0.5 x 4.191) = 4.191m

147
∑ Fi=3,n = 412.15kN
∑ 𝐹𝑖=2,n = 651.77kN
∑ 𝐹𝑖=1,n = 717.96kN

MAC = (651.77x3.2)/(2(5-1)) = 260.71kN (INT.) 260.71/2 = 130.35kN

(EXT.)
MAD = (717.96x1.22)/(2(5-1)) = 109.49kN (INT.) 109.49/2 = 54.74kN
(EXT.)
MAB = MAE = (260.71 + 109.49)/2 = 185.1kN (INT.) 185.1/2 = 92.55kN
(EXT.)

Summary ME for 2 frames (5-1) divided by 4

∑ Fi=3,n = 412.15kN
∑ 𝐹𝑖=2,n = 651.77kN
∑ 𝐹𝑖=1,n = 717.96kN

148
MAC = (651.77x3.2)/(2(6-1)) = 208.57kN (INT.) 208.57/2 = 104.28kN
(EXT.)
MAD = (717.96x1.22)/(2(6-1)) = 87.59kN (INT.) 87.59/2 = 43.8kN (EXT.)
MAB = MAE = (208.57 + 87.59)/2 = 148.08kN (INT.) 148.08/2 = 74.04kN
(EXT.)

Summary ME for 4 frames (6-1) divided by 5

149
COLUMN AXIAL LOADS DUE TO SEISMIC FORCES (shorter direction)
(c)

Overturning Moment (Mo) = [𝐹1 (𝑑1) + 𝐹2 (𝑑1+𝑑2)] / No. of frames

Mo = [(66.19x1.22) + (239.62x(1.22+3.2) + (412.15x(1.22+3.2+3.2))] /
5-1 = 1070.11kNm

PC = 0
PA = PE & P B = PD
TMA Centre-line
PD/4.191 = (PE-PD)/4.191, PD = PE/2
PE = Mo/16.764 i.e. PE = 1070.11/16.764
PE = 63.83kNm = PA
PD = 63.83/2 = 31.92kNm = PB

GRAVITY MOMENTS IN BEAMS (d)

Live Load = 4.79kN/m2 x 4.191 = 20.07kN/m
Dead Load = 2.5kN/m2 x 4.191 = 10.29kN/m

For equal spans, for unit UDL of 1kN/m

MG, SUPPORT = -FL/10 = -4.1912/10 = -1.76kNm

MG, SPAN = 0.08FL = 0.08(4.1912) = 1.41kNm
MD, SUPPORT = -20.07(1.76) = -35.32kNm
MD, SPAN = 20.07(1.41) = 28.3kNm
ML, SUPPORT = -10.29(1.76) = -18.11kNm
ML, SPAN = 10.29(1.41) = 14.51kNm

150
2018
International
GRAVITY MOMENT IN COLUMNS (e)
Building Codes
Table 1607.1 By moment distribution of sub frames
Pg. 368
ASCE-7 2010
https://faculty Internal Column
.arch.tamu.ed
u/media/cms_
page_media/4 Beam Depth = 4.191/26 + 350 = 550mm
198/NS13-
Use beam width of 300mm
1codeloads.pd
f Assume column size is 300x300mm

Beams 550x300 I = bd3/12 = 300x5503/12 = 4.2x109mm4

Columns = 300x300 I = 3004/12 = 6.8x108mm4
Kb = I/L = (4.2x109)/4191 = 10.02x105mm3; KU = (6.8x108)/3200 =
2.1x105mm3
KL = (6.8x108)/1220 = 5.57x105mm3
Total out-of-balance FEM = (DL x trib. area2)/12 – ((DL+LL) x trib.
area2)/12
FEM = (20.07x4.1912)/12 – ((20.07+10.29) x 4.1912)/12 = 29.38 – 44.44
= -15.06kNm

Mupper/lower = FEM x [(KU or KL) / (Kb + KU + KL)]

Mupper = 15.06x[2.1 / (10.02+2.1+5.57)] = 1.79kNm
Mlower = 15.06x[5.57 / (10.02+2.1+5.57)] = 4.74kNm
External Column
Total out-of-balance FEM = (DL x trib. area2)/12
FEM = (20.07x4.1912)/12 =29.38kNm

Mupper/lower = FEM x [(KU or KL) / (0.5Kb + KU + KL)]

Mupper = 29.38x[2.1 / (0.5(10.02)+2.1+5.57)] = 4.87kNm
Mlower = 29.38x[5.57 / (0.5(10.02)+2.1+5.57)] = 12.91kNm

GRAVITY AXIAL FORCES IN COLUMNS (f)

151
By tributary area

Dead = (2.5x4.1912x3) + (7.62x0.32) + (7.62x0.32x24) = 131.73 + 0.6858

+ 16.46 = 148.88kN
Live = 4.79x4.1912x3 = 252.4kNm
External Column Dead = 131.73/2 + 16.46 = 82.33kN

BEAM MOMENT (LONG) REBAR (g)

Ultimate Moment (Mu)
At supports U = 1.4D + 0.5L + 1.4E
Near mid-span, consider U = 1.4D + 1.6L

Internal support (top) Mu = 1.4(35.32) + 0.5(18.11) + 1.4(46.28) =

123.3kNm
External support (top) Mu = 1.4(35.32) + 0.5(18.11) + 1.4(23.14) =
90.9kNm
Span (bottom) Mu = 1.4(28.3) + 1.6(14.51) = 62.84kNm

Internal support rebar d = 550mm, b = 300mm

Mu = 0.9Asfy x (d-a/2) where a = Asfy/(0.85fc’b)
fc’ = 30MPa, fy = 410MPa
a = (As x 410) / (0.85x30x300) = 0.054As

123.3 = 0.9As410 x (550-(0.054As/2))

123.3 = 369As x (550x10-6- 0.027x10-6As)
123.3 = 0.20295As – 9.963x10-6As2
As = 626.83mm2
i.e. use 3#19bars = 284x3 = 852mm2 > 626.83mm2 : OK

External support rebar

90.9 = 0.20295As – 9.963x10-6As2
As = 458.2mm2

152
i.e. use 2#19bars = 284x2 = 568mm2 > 458.2mm2 : OK

Span rebar
62.84 = 0.20295As – 9.963x10-6As2
For internal
As = 314.49mm2 support
use
i.e. use 2#19bars = 284x2 = 568mm2 > 314.49mm2 : OK
3#19bars

For
Summary of Beam long rebar
external
support
use
2#19bars

For span
rebar use
2#19bars

Assume cover = 30mm

BEAM TRANSVERSE (SHEAR HOOP) REBAR (h)

w = 1.2 (D + L) = 1.2 (20.07+10.29) = 36.43kN/m
Mpr1 = As x 1.25fy(d -a/2) = 852 x 1.25 x 410 (550 – (0.054x852)/2) x
10-6 = 230.11kNm

153
 Mpr2 = As x 1.25fy(d -a/2) = 568 x 1.25 x 410 (550 – (0.054x568)/2) x
10-6 = 155.6kNm
(SBC PCTTS
599: 20XX Shear force in hinge, V = 0.75wL/2 +/- (Mpr1+Mpr2)/L
Table 4-7
V = (0.75x36.43x4.191)/2 + (230.11+155.6)/4.191 = 149.29kN
Recommende
d concrete Consider HTS hoops fyv = 410MPa
cover Pg. 69)
Av/s = V/fyvd = (149.29x103)/(410x550) = 0.66mm
For a spacing, s = 100mm, Av = 100x0.66 = 66mm2
Use 2T10 Av = 2x78.5 = 157 > 66mm2 : OK

COLUMN MOMENT REBAR (i)

300x300
Consider load case, U = 1.4D + 0.5L + 1.4E
Ultimate moments:
Internal Column, Mu = 0 + 0.5(4.74) + 1.4(27.37) = 40.69kNm
External Column, Mu = 1.4(12.91)x(20.07/(20.07+10.29)) +
0.5(12.91)x(10.29/(10.29+20.07)) + 1.4(13.69) = 18.07+2.19+19.17 =
39.43kNm
Ultimate axial loads:
Internal Column, Pu = 1.4(148.88) + 0.5(252.4) + 1.4(31.92) =
379.32kN
External Column, Pu = 1.4(74.44) + 0.5(252.4/2) + 1.4(63.83) =
256.68kN

154
 Design Pu, Mu:
Internal Column = 379.32, 1.4(40.69) = (379.32, 56.97)
External Column = 256.68, 1.4(39.43) = (256.68, 55.2)

Internal Column:
Assuming 4ksi concrete, 30mm cover, 10 mm hoops and 19mm bars; γ
= 0.7
Kn internal col. = Pu/( ϕfc’Ag) = (379.32x103)/(0.8x30x3002) = 0.176
Rn internal col. = Mu/( ϕfc’Agh) = (56.97x106)/(0.8x30x3003) = 0.089

1% < Pg = 1 < 6% : OK
i.e. As, required = 1x3002/100 = 900mm2
Use 4T19 = 1136 > 900mm2 = OK
External Column:
Kn internal col. = Pu/( ϕfc’Ag) = (256.68x103)/(0.8x30x3002) = 0.119
Rn internal col. = Mu/( ϕfc’Agh) = (55.2x106)/(0.8x30x3003) = 0.085
ACI 318 SIC
(ACI R4-60.7)
Pg. 30
1% < Pg = 1 < 6% : OK
i.e. As, required = 1x3002/100 = 900mm2
Use 4T19 = 1136 > 900mm2 = OK

COLUMN HOOPS (j)

Use T12-100 in the confinement zone of 1mfrom the top and bottom
ACI 318 SIC
of the column. Use T12-200 outside the confinement zone
(ACI R4-60.7)
Pg. 30 accompanied by one closed overall loop enclosing all longitudinal
bars.
SUMMARY OF COLUMN REBAR:

Use 4T19
bars, 2
each side

155
 Use T12-
200

INTERNAL COLUMN

INTERNAL AND EXTERNAL COLUMN DESIGN

156
 ENGINEER’S COST ESTIMATE (EX VAT): For Community Centre and Nursery RC

Alternative 1

CONCRETE:

Slabs = 3x385.82x0.15 = 173.62m3

Beams = [(4.191x24)+(3.603x25)]x3x0.55x0.3 = 94.37m3

Columns = 0.3x0.3x[(1.22x30)+(3.2x60)] = 20.57m3

Footings (2.5x2.5x0.3) = 30x2.52x0.3= 56.25m3

TOTAL = 344.81m3

REBAR:

Slabs at 1 tonne per 12m3 concrete = 173.62/12 = 14.46tonne

Beams 19mm = 190.659x8(bars)x2.24(kg/m)x3(floors)/1000 = 10.3tonnes

Beams 19mm = 7.62x((2x1048/100)+(2096/200))x1.7x3(floors)x2.24)/1000 = 2.74tonnes

Columns 19mm = (no of bars)8x(no of col)30x2.24/1000 = 0.5tonnes

Columns hoops 12mm = 3x2(480/100+ 480/200)x1.3x2x2 + 3x2(480/100+ 480/200)x1.3x2x2 +

12x3(480/100+ 480/200)x1.3x2x2 + 12x3(480/100+ 560/200)x0.8 + 12x(480/100+

560/200)x1.3x2x2 + 12x(480/100+ 560/200)x0.8 = 1.2tonnes

Footings = 31/12 = 2.6tonnes

TOTAL = 31.8tonnes

157
MASONRY:

Consider 400x200x150 ASTM C90 unreinforced hollow concrete units

Nr of blocks = 3x7.62x22.556/0.4x0.2 = 6446m

Mortar = 6446x(0.1+0.1+0.4)x0.15x0.012 = 6.96m3

Nr bags of cement = 0.25x6.94x1440/42.5 = 59m

Sand = 0.75x59 = 44m3

GRADE SLAB:

Consider 125mm thick and 610 BRC (30.5mx1.8m roll)

i.e. Concrete = 22.556x16.459x0.125 = 46.41m3

BRC = 22.556x16.459/30.5x1.8 = 6.76 i.e. 7rolls

Table 33: ENGINEER’S COST ESTIMATE (EX VAT): For Community Centre and Nursery RC Alternative 1

TIME AMOUNT UNIT RATE (TT$) TOTAL (TT$)

Conc. For superstructure 345 m3 1,380.00 475,838
Rebar 32 Tonne 7,498.00 238,436
Formwork at 25% materials 178,569
Labour at 65% of above 892,843
Blocks 6,446 Nr. 5.75 37,065
Bags of cement for blocks 59 Nr. 53.50 3,157
Sand for blocks 44 m3 200.00 8,800
Labour for blocks at 65% 26,144
Grade slab concrete 46 m3 1,380.00 64,046
Grade slab BRC 7 Nr. 449.00 3,143
Labour for grade slab at 50% 33,594
TOTAL STRUCTURAL 1,961,633
TOTAL SERVICES 1,961,633
TOTAL ARCHITECTURAL 3,923,266.70
TOTAL STR, SERV, ARCH 7,846,533
Preliminaries at 5% 392,327
Contingency at 15% 1,176,980
CONSTRUCTION COST 9,415,840
OVERHEAD & PROFIT AT 30% 2,353,960
GRAND TOTAL $ 13,339,106.78

NOTES: Price per ft2 = $3338.11

158
References Calculations Output

(Ullah 2017) SINGLE BEDROOM APARTMENT (2 STOREYS: GROUND AND 2 UNITS

PER BUILDING) STEEL DESIGN ALTERNATIVE 2

SEISMIC LOAD: 1
Total Building Weight (W) = 1817.02kN x 20% to cater for connections
W = 1817.02 x 1.20 = 2180.42kN
Assuming a linear distribution

Seismic Load (V) = 0.1W = 0.1(2180.42) = 218.04kN

V = F1 + F2
F2/ F1 = (1.22 + 3.2)/1.22, F2 = 3.62F1
218.04 = F1 + 3.62F1 = 4.62F1
F1 = 47.19kN
F2 = 170.85kN
Check:
47.19 + 170.85 = 218.04kN : OK

MOMENTS DUE TO SEISMIC LOADS: 2

Tributary width assuming equal spans in the short direction
(4.877 + 3.658)/2 = 4.268m
2 x (0.5 x 4.268) = 4.268m

∑ 𝐹𝑖=2,n = 170.85kN
∑ 𝐹𝑖=1,n = 218.04kN

MAC = (170.85x3.2)/(2(1)) = 273.36kN (INT.) /2 = 136.68kN (EXT.)

MAD = (218.04x1.22)/(2(1)) = 133kN (INT.) /2 = 66.5kN (EXT.)
MAB = MAE = (136.68 + 133)/2 = 134.84kN (INT.) /2 = 67.42kN (EXT.)

159
Summary ME for 2 frames (3-1) divided by 2

COLUMN AXIAL LOADS DUE TO SEISMIC FORCES: 3

Overturning Moment (Mo) = [𝐹1 (𝑑1) + 𝐹2 (𝑑1+𝑑2)] / No. of frames
Mo = [(40.12x1.22) + (145.22x(1.22+3.2))] / 3-1 = 345.41kNm
PE = Mo/L = 345.41 x 2/(2x3.429) = 100.73kN

GRAVITY MOMENTS IN BEAMS: 4

WD = 2.5 x (4.268/2) x (4.268/2) = 11.38kN
WL = 11.38 x (1.2/2.5) = 5.46kN

i.e. MD, SUPPORT = -0.167x2x4.268x11.38 = -16.22kNm

MD, SPAN = 0.111x2x4.268x11.38 = 10.78kNm
ML, SUPPORT = -0.167x2x4.268x5.46 = -7.78kNm
ML, SPAN = 0.111x2x4.268x5.46 = 5.17kNm

GRAVITY MOMENTS IN COLUMNS: 5

Dead load = 2.5kN/m2 x 4.268 = 10.67kN/m
Live Load = 1.5kN/m2 x 4.268 = 6.4kN/m
Total out-of-balance FEM = (DL x trib. area2)/12 – ((DL+LL) x trib.
area2)/12
FEM = (10.67x4.2682)/12 – ((10.67+6.4) x 4.2682)/12 =16.20 - 26 = -
9.8kNm

Mupper/lower = FEM x 60% OR 35%

Mupper = 9.8x0.6 = 5.88kNm
Mlower = 9.8x0.35 = 3.43kNm

160
GRAVITY AXIAL FORCES IN COLUMNS: 6
Dead = 3x2.5x4.2682 /2 = 136.62kN
Live = 136.62x(1.5/2.5) = 81.97kN

BEAM SIZE: 7
Consider U = 1.4D+0.5L+1.4E
Mu = (1.4x16.22) + (0.5x7.78) + (1.4x67.42) = 120.99kNm
For ASTM A992 Grade 50
Zreq>M/0.9Fy: Fy=345Mpa
Zrequired = 120.99x106/(0.9x345x103) = 389.65cm3 (23.78in3)
Use W10x45 (54.9>23.78in3 : OK)
(Structural drafting steel sections 2006-2021)

CHECK BEAM LOCAL BUCKLING INT=STABILITY (i.e. SEISMIC

COMPACTNESS): 8
b/2tf = 6.5 ; λmax = 0.3(E/Fy) = 0.3√(29000/50) = 7.22>6.5 :OK
h/w = 22.5 ; λmax = 2.45(E/Fy) = 2.45√(29000/50) = 59>22.5 :OK

CHECK UNBRACED LENGTH OF BEAM FLANGES: 9

Max length = 0.086ryE/Fy = 0.086x2.01x29000/50 = 100.26in =
2546.60mm
Unbraced length = 4268/2 = 2134 < 2546.604mm : OK
Use W10x45

COLUMN SIZE FOR STRONG-COLUMN-WEAK BEAM (SCWB): 10

Beam plastic moment strength, Mp = FyZ = 50x54.9/12= 228.75kip-ft
Beam depth = 10.1in
Assume location of beam plastic hinge is 1.6 times beam total depth
from the column center-line, ie.x=1.6db
i.e. Shear force in plastic hinge, Vp = 2Mp/(L-2x) + w(L-2x)/2 =
(2x228.75)/(4.268x3.28-2(1.6x10.10/2)) +

161
(1.2(10.67+6.4))x0.74x(4.268x3.28-(1.6x10.10/2))/2 = 126.15kip
(561.14kN)
Moment due to Vp ( i.e. Mv) = 126.15x1.6x10.10 /12 = 169.68kip-ft
∑Mpb* = ∑ (1.1RyMp + Mv)
Ry = 1.1 for ASTM A992M
∑Mpb* = 1.1x1.1x228.75 + 169.68 = 446.47kip-ft
∑Mpc* = ∑ (ZcFyc) = 2Zcx50 = 1.5x446.47x12 : Zc (Zx) = 80.36in3
Use W14x82 (139 > 80.36in3 : OK)

CHECK COLUMN LOCAL BUCKLING: 11

b/2tf = 5.9 ; λmax = 0.3(E/Fy) = 0.3√(29000/50) = 7.22>5.9 :OK
h/w = 22.4 ; λmax = 2.45(E/Fy) = 2.45√(29000/50) = 59>22.4 :OK

CHECK DRIFT: 12
For beam and column sizes selected
Beams: W10x45, Ix=248 in4 Columns: W14x82, Ix=881 in4
Ib = Ib*=Ib*/L* = ∑Ib/L = (248x0.02544)/4.268 = 2.42x10-5
Ic = Ic* = ∑Ic/h = (2x881x0.02544)/1.22 = 6.01x10-4
Stiffness ratio, VG = (Ib*/L*)/( Ic*/h) = 2.42/60.1 = 0.0403 i.e. εG ≅ 1.4
Drift = ∆Ug/hg = Cd(3 εG-1)(∑F)hG2 /(12EIc)
Cd(3 εG-1)(∑F)hG2 / 12EIc = [5.5(3x1.4-1)1.222 /
(12x210x106x(882x0.02544))]x (0.1x1853.36/2)x100% = (26.19584 /
925132.6159) x 92.668(100) = 0.26%<2% :OK

CHECK UNIT EQUATION (COLUMN STRENGTH): 13

Consider U = 1.4D+0.5L+1.4E
Pu = (1.4x136.62) + (0.5x81.97) + (1.4x100.73) = 373.28kN
λc = 1.1L√(Fy/E)/(π ry)
λc = 1.1x1.22x3.28x12√(50/29000)/(3.14x2.48) = 0.786 : Y=0.6178
Fcr = 0.658Y x Fy = 0.6580.0576 x 50 = 38.61ksi
φPn = 0.8 Fcr A = 0.8x38.61x24 = 741.26kip = 2297.29kN
Pu/ φPn = 373.28/2297.29 = 0.21 > 0.2

162
P/ 2φPn + 8/9[ (Mz/ 0.8Mnz) + (My/ 0.8Mny) ]
Muz = 0.5x3.43 + 1.4x66.5 = 94.82kNm
= 0.21/2 + (8x94.82)/(9x0.8x1.35x457.5 2Mp step 10) = 0.28 < 1 : OK

NON-SEISMIC BEAMS: 14
Consider U = 1.2D+1.6L
Mu = 1.2x16.22 + 1.6x7.78 = 31.91kNm
Zrequired = 31.91x106/(0.9x345x103) = 102.77cm3 (6.27in3)
Use W10x12 (12.6>6.27in3 : OK)

NON-SEISMIC COLUMS: 15
Consider U = 1.2D+1.6L
Max moment on internal column, Mu = 1.6x2x3.43 = 10.98kNm
step 5
Max axial force on internal column, Pu = 1.2x2x136.62 + 1.6x2x81.97 =
590.19kN step 6
Effective height = 0.85x1220 = 1037mm = 3.402ft

163
References Calculations Output

COMMUNITY CENTRE AND NURSERY (3 STOREYS: GROUND AND 2

ADDITIONAL STORIES) STEEL DESIGN ALTERNATIVE 2

SEISMIC LOAD: 1
Total Building Weight (W) = 7182.09kN x 20% to cater for connections
W = 7182.09 x 1.20 = 8618.51kN
Assuming a linear distribution

Seismic Load (V) = 0.1W = 0.1(8618.51) = 861.85kN

V = F1 + F2 + F3
F2/ F1 = (1.22 + 3.2)/1.22, F2 = 3.62F1
F3/F2 = (1.22+3.2+3.2)/(1.22+3.2), F3 = 1.72F2
F1 + F2 + F3 = F1 + 3.62F1 + (1.72x3.62)F1 = 10.85F1 = 861.85kN
F1 = 79.43kN
F2 = 287.55kN
F3 = 494.58kN
Check:
79.43 + 287.55 + 494.58 = 861.56kN : OK

MOMENTS DUE TO SEISMIC LOADS: 2

Tributary width assuming equal spans in the short direction
(4.191 + 4.191)/2 = 4.191m
2 x (0.5 x 4.191) = 4.191m

∑ Fi=3,n = 494.58kN
∑ 𝐹𝑖=2,n = 782.13kN
∑ 𝐹𝑖=1,n = 861.56kN

MAC = (782.13x3.2)/(2(1)) = 1251.41kN (INT.) /2 = 625.7kN (EXT.)

164
 MAD = (861.56x1.22)/(2(1)) = 525.55kN (INT.) /2 = 262.78kN (EXT.)
MAB = MAE = (1251.41 + 525.55)/2 = 888.48kN (INT.) /2 = 444.24kN
(EXT.)

Summary ME for 2 frames (3-1) divided by 2

COLUMN AXIAL LOADS DUE TO SEISMIC FORCES: 3

Overturning Moment (Mo) = [𝐹1 (𝑑1) + 𝐹2 (𝑑1+𝑑2)] / No. of frames
Mo = [(79.43x1.22) + (287.55x(1.22+3.2)) + (494.58x(1.22+3.2+3.2))] /
4 = 1284.14kNm
PE = Mo/L = 1284.14 x 5/(2x4.191) = 766.01kN

GRAVITY MOMENTS IN BEAMS: 4

WD = 2.5 x (4.191/2) x (4.191/2) = 10.98kN
WL = 10.98 x (4.79/2.5) = 21.04kN

(Janicki 2009- i.e. MD, SUPPORT = -0.143x2x4.191.98 = -13.16kNm

2021)
MD, SPAN = 0.118x2x4.191.98 = 10.86kNm
ML, SUPPORT = -0.143x2x4.191.04 = -25.18kNm
ML, SPAN = 0.118x2x4.191.04 = 20.78kNm

GRAVITY MOMENTS IN COLUMNS: 5

Dead load = 2.5kN/m2 x 4.4.191 = 10.48kN/m
Live Load = 4.79kN/m2 x 4.191 = 20.07kN/m
Total out-of-balance FEM = (DL x trib. area2)/12 – ((DL+LL) x trib.
area2)/12
FEM = (10.48x4.1912)/12 – ((10.48+20.07) x 4.1912)/12 =15.34 – 44.72
= -29.38kNm

165
 Mupper/lower = FEM x 60% OR 35%
Mupper = 29.38x0.6 = 17.63kNm
Mlower = 29.38x0.35 = 10.28kNm

GRAVITY AXIAL FORCES IN COLUMNS: 6

Dead = 5x2.5x4.1912 /2 = 109.78kN
Live = 109.78x(4.79/2.5) = 210.33kN

BEAM SIZE: 7
Consider U = 1.4D+0.5L+1.4E
Mu = (1.4x13.16) + (0.5x25.18) + (1.4x444.24) = 652.95kNm
For ASTM A992 Grade 50
Zreq>M/0.9Fy: Fy=345Mpa
Zrequired = 652.95x106/(0.9x345) = 2102.9cm3 (128.33in3)
Use W12x96 (147>128.33in3 : OK)

CHECK BEAM LOCAL BUCKLING INT=STABILITY (i.e. SEISMIC

COMPACTNESS): 8
b/2tf = 6.8 ; λmax = 0.3(E/Fy) = 0.3√(29000/50) = 7.22>6.8 :OK
(Structural h/w = 17.7 ; λmax = 2.45(E/Fy) = 2.45√(29000/50) = 59>17.7 :OK
drafting steel
sections 2006-
2021) CHECK UNBRACED LENGTH OF BEAM FLANGES: 9
Max length = 0.086ryE/Fy = 0.086x3.09x29000/50 = 154.13in =
3914.9mm
Unbraced length = 4191/2 = 2095.5 < 3914.9mm :OK
Use W12x96
COLUMN SIZE FOR STRONG-COLUMN-WEAK BEAM (SCWB): 10
Beam plastic moment strength, Mp = FyZ = 50x147/12= 612.5kip-ft
Beam depth = 12.71in
Assume location of beam plastic hinge is 1.6 times beam total depth
from the column center-line, ie.x=1.6db

166
 i.e. Shear force in plastic hinge, Vp = 2Mp/(L-2x) + w(L-2x)/2 =
(2x612.5)/(4.191x3.28-2(1.6x12.71/2)) +
(1.2(20.07+10.48))x0.74x(4.191x3.28-(1.6x12.71/2))/2 = 258.76kip
(1150.75kN)
Moment due to Vp ( i.e. Mv) = 258.76x1.6x12.71 /12 = 438.51kip-ft
∑Mpb* = ∑ (1.1RyMp + Mv)
Ry = 1.1 for ASTM A992M
∑Mpb* = 1.1x1.1x612.5 + 438.51 = 1179.64kip-ft
∑Mpc* = ∑ (ZcFyc) = 2Zcx50 = 1.5x1179.64x12 : Zc (Zx) = 212.33in3
Use W12x152 (243 > 212.33in3 : OK)

CHECK COLUMN LOCAL BUCKLING: 11

b/2tf = 4.5 ; λmax = 0.3(E/Fy) = 0.3√(29000/50) = 7.22>4.5 :OK
h/w = 11.2 ; λmax = 2.45(E/Fy) = 2.45√(29000/50) = 59>11.2 :OK

CHECK DRIFT: 12
For beam and column sizes selected
Beams: W12x96, Ix=833 in4 Columns: W12x152, Ix=1430 in4
Ib = Ib*=Ib*/L* = ∑Ib/L = (833x0.02544)/4.191 = 8.27x10-5
Ic = Ic* = ∑Ic/h = (2x1240x0.02544)/1.22 = 8.46x10-4
Stiffness ratio, VG = (Ib*/L*)/( Ic*/h) = 8.27/84.6 = 0.1 i.e. εG ≅ 1.4
Drift = ∆Ug/hg = Cd(3 εG-1)(∑F)hG2 /(12EIc)
Cd(3 εG-1)(∑F)hG2 / 12EIc = [5.5(3x1.4-1)1.222 /
(12x210x106x(1240x0.02544))]x (0.1x8618.51/2)x100% = (26.19584 /
SEISMIC 1300639.959) x 430.9255(100) = 0.87%<2% :OK
DESIGN
PROCEDURES:
A MANUAL CHECK UNIT EQUATION (COLUMN STRENGTH): 13
FOR
PRACTICING Consider U = 1.4D+0.5L+1.4E
ENGINEERS Pu = (1.4x109.78) + (0.5x210.33) + (1.4x766.01) = 1331.27kN
(Clarke n.d.)
Fig 9.2 λc = 1.1L√(Fy/E)/(π ry)
λc = 1.1x1.22x3.28x12√(50/29000)/(3.14x3.19) = 0.693 : Y=0.4802
Fcr = 0.658Y x Fy = 0.6580.4802 x 50 = 40.9ksi

167
φPn = 0.8 Fcr A = 0.8x40.9x44.7= 1462.584kip = 6505.9kN
Pu/ φPn = 1331.27/6505.9 = 0.2≥0.2
P/ 2φPn + 8/9[ (Mz/ 0.8Mnz) + (My/ 0.8Mny) ]
Muz = 0.5x10.28 + 1.4x262.78 = 373.03kNm
= 0.21/2 + (8x373.03)/(9x0.8x1.35x1225) = 0.35 < 1 : OK

NON-SEISMIC BEAMS: 14
Consider U = 1.2D+1.6L
Mu = 1.2x13.16 + 1.6x25.18 = 56.08kNm
Zrequired = 56.08x106/(0.9x345x103) = 180.61cm3 (11.02in3)
Use W10x12 (12.6>11.02in3 : OK)

NON-SEISMIC COLUMS: 15
Consider U = 1.2D+1.6L
Max moment on internal column, Mu = 1.6x2x10.28 = 32.9kNm
Max axial force on internal column, Pu = 1.2x2x109.78 + 1.6x2x210.33
= 936.53kN
Effective height = 0.85x1220 = 1037mm = 3.402ft

168
 ENGINEER’S COST ESTIMATE (EX VAT): For Community Centre and Nursery Steel

Alternative 2

CONCRETE:

Concrete for decking for 125mm equivalent thickness = 3x16.4592x22.556x0.125 = 139.22m3

Footings (2.5x2.5x0.3) = 30x2.52x0.3= 56.25m3

TOTAL = 195.47m3

STEELWORK:

Seismic beams = 18x4.602x3.28x96x0.46= 11998kg

Seismic columns = 8x7.62x3.28x152x0.46= 13980kg

Non-seismic beams = 18x3x4.191x3.28x12x0.46= 4098kg

Non-seismic columns = 8x7.62x3.28x99x0.46= 9106kg

Composite beams = 40x3x4.191x3.28x12x0.46= 9106kg

TOTAL = 48288kg

Composite decking, Composite decking, 20ft long x 25’’ wide = 3x(22.556x12/25)x16.459x3.28=

1753.48ft

Decking BRC, 610x6ftx100ft=3x22.556x16.459/(30.5x1.8)= 21 rolls

169
Table 34: ENGINEER’S COST ESTIMATE (EX VAT): For Community Centre and Nursery Steel Alternative 2

TIME AMOUNT UNIT RATE (TT$) TOTAL (TT$)

Conc. For Decking 195 m3 1,380.00 269,749
Decking 1,753 ft 22.00 38,566
BRC Decking 21 Nr. Rolls 598.20 12,562
Steelwork 48,288 kg 21.10 1,018,877
Accessories at 25% 254,719
Blocks (inc mortar) 417,005
Labour for blocks at 65% 271,053
Grade slab 283,615
TOTAL STRUCTURAL 2,566,146
TOTAL SERVICES 1,283,073
TOTAL ARCHITECTURAL 7,185,210
TOTAL STR, SERV, ARCH 11,034,429
Preliminaries at 5% 551,721
Contingency at 15% 1,655,164
CONSTRUCTION COST 13,241,315
OVERHEAD & PROFIT AT 30% 3,310,329
GRAND TOTAL $ 18,758,530.07

NOTES: Price per ft2 = $4694.33

170
 Figure 32: Layout of Single Bedroom Apartment

Figure 33: Front Elevation of Single Bedroom Apartment

171
 Figure 34: Layout of 2 Bedroom Apartment

Figure 35: Front Elevation of 2 Bedroom Apartment

172
Figure 36: Layout of Small House

173
 Figure
37: Elevation of small house

174
Figure 38: Layout of Large House Ground Floor

Figure 39: Layout of Large House First Floor

175
Figure 40: Elevation of a large house

176
Figure 41: Layout of Community Center and Nursery Ground Floor

177
Figure 42: Layout of Community Center and Nursery First Floor

178
Figure 43: Elevation of Community Center and Nursery

179
Figure 44: Layout of Health Centre Ground Floor

180
Figure 45: Layout of Health Centre First Floor

181
Figure 46: Elevation of Health Cent

182
 Preliminary Structural Design of a Steel SMRF for the Two-Storey Small House

References Calculations Output

Seismic Step 1
Design SEISMIC LOAD

Procedures: A
Manual for
Practicing
Engineers
Chapter 9
From the RC SMRF Two-Storey House Design
Recall:
Building Weight (W) = 1902.04 kN
Assuming an increase of 20% of the building weight to cater for connections
1902.04 x 20% = 380.408
Total Building Weight (W) = 1902.04 + 380.408 = 2282.45 kN
Assuming a linear distribution
Seismic Load (V) = 0.1W = 0.1(2282.45) = 228.25 kN
V = F1 + F2
F1 F2 − F1
=
1.2 2.8
As F1 + F2 = V
Therefore, F1 = V – F2
V − F2 F2 − (V − F2)
=
1.2 2.8
1.2 (V- F2) = 2.8 (F2 – V + F2)
4V = 6.8F2
V = 228.25 kN
4(228.25) = 6.8F2 F1
F2 = 134.26 kN = 93.99 kN
F1 = 93.99 kN F2
= 134.26 kN

183
 Check: OK
134.26 + 93.99 = 228.25 kN
Seismic Step 2
Design MOMENTS DUE TO SEISMIC LOADS

Procedures: A
Manual for
Practicing
Engineers
Chapter 9
Assuming equal spans in the shorter direction
4.4 + 2.1
= 3.25 m
2
Therefore, tributary width = 2 x (0.5 x 3.25) = 3.25 m

Where:
h1 = 2.8 m h2 = 1.2 m ncol = 2
Columns:
First Floor:

134.26 ×2.8
MAC = 2
= 187.96 kNm (INT) ; 93.98 kNm (EXT)

Second Floor:

(228.25) ×1.2
MAD = 2
= 136.95 kNm (INT) ; 68.45 kNm (EXT)
MAC
= 187.96 kNm
Beams: MAD
= 136.95 kNm
MAB
MAB = MAE = 0.5(187.96 +136.95) = 162.46 kNm (INT) ; 81.3 kNm (EXT)
= 162.46 kNm
MAE
= 162.46 kNm

184
Seismic Summary: divide by 2 frames
Design
Procedures: A
Manual for
Practicing
Engineers
Chapter 9

Step 3:
COLUMN AXIAL LOADS DUE TO SEISMIC FORCES
Overturning moment:
F1h1+F2(h1+h2) MO =324.9 kNm
MO = n−1
(93.99 x 1.2)+134.26(1.2+2.8)
MO = 3−1
= 324.9 kNm
MO 324.9 ×2
PE = = = 99.97 kN
L 2 ×3.25

Step 4:
GRAVITY MOMENTS IN BEAMS:
Consider as a continuous beam and use standard tables. Hence from the standard
tables, the moment coefficients for equidistant unit point loads on each span of an
equidistant 2 span beam are:

WD = 4.1 x (3.25 /2) x (3.25/2) = 10.83kN

WL = 10.83 x (1.5/4.1) = 3.96kN

185
Seismic MD, SUPPORT = -0.188 x 2 x 3.25 x 10.83= -13.23kNm MD, supp =
Design MD, SPAN = 0.158 x 2 x 3.25 x 10.83= 11.12kNm -13.23kNm

Procedures: A ML, SUPPORT = -0.188 x 2 x 3.25 x 3.96 = -4.83kNm MD, span =

ML, SPAN = 0.156 x 2 x 3.25 x 3.96 = 4.07kNm 11.12kNm
Manual for
ML, supp =
Practicing
Step 5 -4.83kNm
Engineers
GRAVITY MOMENTS IN COLUMNS ML, span =
Chapter 9
Dead load = 4.1 x 3.25 = 13.34 kN/m 4.07kNm
Live load = 1.5 x 3.25 = 4.875 kN/m

Total OB FEM:
13.34 × 3.252 (13.34 + 4.875) × 3.252
= −
12 12
= 11.74 − 16.03 = −4.29 kNm

Mupper/lower = FEM x 60% OR 35%

Mupper = 4.29x0.6 = 2.57kNm
Mlower = 4.29x0.35 = 1.5kNm

Step 6
GRAVITY AXIAL FORCES IN COLUMNS: 6
Dead = 3x 4.1 x 3.252 /2 = 64.96 kN
Live = 64.96 x (1.5/4.1) = 23.77 kN

Step 7
BEAM SIZE
Consider U = 1.4D+0.5L+1.4E
Mu = (1.4 x 13.23) + (0.5 x 4.83) + (1.4 x 81.3) = 134.76kNm
For ASTM A992 Grade 50
Zreq>M/0.9Fy: Fy=45 Mpa
Zrequired = 134.76x106/(0.9x345) = 434cm3 (26.48 4in3)
Use W10x30
Use W10x30 (36.6>26.48in3 : OK)
OK

186
Seismic Step 8:
Design CHECK BEAM LOCAL BUCKLING INSTABILITY (i.e. SEISMIC

Procedures: A COMPACTNESS)

Manual for b/2tf = 5.7; λmax = 0.3(E/Fy) = 0.3√(29000/50) = 7.22>5.7 :OK

h/w = 29.5; λmax = 2.45(E/Fy) = 2.45√(29000/50) = 59>29.5 :OK OK
Practicing
Engineers
Step 9
Chapter 9
CHECK UNBRACED LENGTH OF BEAM FLANGES
Max length = 0.086ryE/Fy = 0.086x1.37x29000/50 = 68.34in = 1735.84mm
Unbraced length = 3250/2 = 1625 ≮ 1735.84 mm OK
Use W10x30 Use W10x30

Step 10
COLUMN SIZE FOR STRONG-COLUMN-WEAK BEAM (SCWB)
Beam plastic moment strength, Mp = FyZ = 50x36.6/12= 152.5 kip-ft
Beam depth = 10.47in
Assume location of beam plastic hinge is 1.6 times beam total depth from the column
center-line, ie.x=1.6db

i.e. Shear force in plastic hinge, Vp = 2Mp/(L-2x) + w(L-2x)/2 =

2 x 152.5 / (3.25 x 3.28-2 x 1.6 x 10.47/12) + 1.2(10.83 + 3.96) x 0.3 x
(3.25 x 3.28-2 x 1.6 x10.47/12) /2
= 59.7kip (265.55 kN)

Moment due to Vp (i.e. Mv) = 59.7 x 1.6 x 10.47 /12 = 83.35 kip-ft
∑Mpb* = ∑ (1.1RyMp + Mv)
1.1 for ASTM A992M
∑Mpb* = 1.1x1.1x 152.5 + 83.35 = 268 kip-ft
∑Mpc* = ∑ (ZcFyc) = 2Zcx50 = 1.5 x 268 x 12 : Zc = 48.25in3 Use W10x45
Use W10x45 (54.9 > 48.25 in3 : OK) OK

187
Seismic Step 11
Design CHECK COLUMN LOCAL BUCKLING

Procedures: A b/2tf = 6.5 ; λmax = 0.3(E/Fy) = 0.3√(29000/50) = 7.22>6.5 :OK

Manual for h/w = 22.5 ; λmax = 2.45(E/Fy) = 2.45√(29000/50) = 59>22.5 :OK OK

Practicing
Step 12
Engineers
CHECK DRIFT
Chapter 9
For beam and column sizes selected
Beams: W10x30, Ix=170 in4 Columns: W10x45,, Ix=248 in4
Ib = Ib*=Ib*/L* = ∑Ib/L = (170x0.02544)/3.25 = 2.18x10-5
Ic = Ic* = ∑Ic/h = (2 x 248 x 0.02544)/1.2 = 1.72 1x10-4
Stiffness ratio, VG = (Ib*/L*)/( Ic*/h) = 2.18/17.2 = 0.126 i.e. εG ≅ 1.4 (Fig. 9.2)

Drift = ∆Ug/hg = Cd(3 εG-1)(∑F)hG2 /(12EIc)

∑F = 0.1W/no. of frames = 228.25/2

Cd(3 εG-1)(∑F)hG2 / 12EIc

= [5.5(3x1.4-1)1.22 / (12x210x106x(248x0.02544))] x (0.1x2282.45/2)x100%
= 1.1 % < 2%: OK OK

Step 13
CHECK UNIT EQUATION (COLUMN STRENGTH)

Consider U =1.4D + 0.5L + 1.4E

Pu = 1.4 x 64.96 + 0.5x 23.77 + 1.4 x 99.97 = 242.79 Kn
λc = 1.1L√(Fy/E)/(π ry)
λc = 1.1x1.22x3.28x12√(50/29000)/(3.14x3.19) = 0.693 : Y=0.4802
Fcr = 0.658Y x Fy = 0.6580.4802 x 50 = 40.9ksi
φPn = 0.8 Fcr A = 0.8x40.9x44.7= 1462.584kip = 6505.9kN
Pu/ φPn = 1331.27/6505.9 = 0.2≥0.2
P/ 2φPn + 8/9[ (Mz/ 0.8Mnz) + (My/ 0.8Mny) ]
Muz = 0.5x10.28 + 1.4x262.78 = 373.03kNm
= 0.21/2 + (8x373.03)/(9x0.8x1.35x1225) = 0.35 < 1 : OK OK

188
Seismic Step 14
Design NON-SEISMIC BEAMS

Procedures: A Consider U =1.2D + 1.6L

Mu = 1.2x 13.23+ 1.6x4.83= 23.6 kNm
Manual for
Zrequired = 23.6x106/(0.9x350x103)= 74.92cm3 = 4.57in3
Practicing
Use W10x15 (16>4.57in3 : OK) Use W10x15
Engineers
Chapter 9
Step 15
NON-SEISMIC COLUMNS

Consider U = 1.2D+1.6L
Max moment on internal column, Mu = 1.6x2x1.5 = 4.8kNm
Max axial force on internal column, Pu = 1.2x2x64.96+ 1.6x2x23.77 =
231kN
Effective height = 0.85x1220 = 1037mm = 3.4ft

COST ESTIMATION

CONCRETE:
Concrete for decking for 200mm equivalent thickness = 2x116x0.2 = 46.4m3
Footings = Footings (assume 1.8x1.8x0.6) = 15x1.82x0.6 = 29.16m3
TOTAL = 75.56m3

STEELWORK:
Seismic beams = 21x4.2x3.28x30x0.46= 3992kg
Seismic columns = 10x4x3.28x45x0.46= 2715kg
Non-seismic beams = 21x2x4.2x3.28x15x0.46=3992kg
Non-seismic columns = 5x4x3.28x99x0.46= 2987kg
Composite beams = 16x2x4.2x3.28x15x0.46= 3041kg
TOTAL = 16727kg
Composite decking, Composite decking, 20ft long x 25’’ wide
= 2x(16.1x12/25)x7.2x3.28= 365ft
Decking BRC, 610x6ftx100ft=2x16.1x7.2/(30.5x1.8)= 4 rolls

189
 Table 35: Steel Moment Resisting Framed Small House

TIME AMOUNT UNIT RATE (TT$) TOTAL (TT$)

Conc. For Decking 76 m3 1,380.00 104,273
Decking 365 ft 22.00 8,030
BRC Decking 4 Nr. Rolls 598.20 2,393
Steelwork 16,727 kg 21.10 352,940
Accessories at 25% 88,235
Blocks (inc mortar) 211,617
Labour for blocks at 65% 137,551
Grade slab 139,944
TOTAL STRUCTURAL 1,044,983
TOTAL SERVICES 522,491
TOTAL ARCHITECTURAL 2,925,952
TOTAL STR, SERV, ARCH 4,493,426
Preliminaries at 5% 224,671
Contingency at 15% 674,014
CONSTRUCTION COST 5,392,111
OVERHEAD & PROFIT AT 30% 1,348,028
GRAND TOTAL $ 7,638,823.54

190
 Preliminary Structural Design of a Steel SMRF for the Two-Storey Health Center

References Calculations Output

Seismic Design Step 1
Procedures: A SEISMIC LOAD

Manual for
Practicing
Engineers
Chapter 9

From the RC SMRF Two-Storey House Design

Recall:
Building Weight (W) = 4414.64kN
Assuming an increase of 20% of the building weight to cater for connections
4414.64x 20% = 882.928
Total Building Weight (W) = 4414.64x + 882.928= 5297.5 kN
Assuming a linear distribution
Seismic Load (V) = 0.1W = 0.1(5297.55) = 529.75 kN
F1 F2 − F1
=
3 3
As F1 + F2 = V
Therefore, F1 = V – F2
V − F2 F2 − (V − F2)
=
3 3
3 (V- F2) = 3 (F2 – V + F2)
6V = 9F2
V = 529.75 kN
6(529.75) = 9F2
F2 = 352.16 kN
F1 = 177.59 kN
F1 = 177.59 kN
Check: F2 = 352.16 kN
177.59 + 352.16 = 529.75 kN
OK

191
Seismic Design
Procedures: A Step 2

Manual for MOMENTS DUE TO SEISMIC LOADS

Practicing
Engineers
Chapter 9

Assuming equal spans in the shorter direction

6+6
= 6m
2
Therefore, tributary width = 2 x (0.5 x 6) = 6 m

Where:
h1 = 3 m h2 = 3 m ncol = 2
Columns:
First Floor:

352.16 ×3
MAC = 2
= 528.24 kNm (INT) ; 264.12 kNm (EXT)

Second Floor:

(529.75) ×3
MAD = 2
= 794.625 kNm (INT) ; 397.3 kNm (EXT) MAC
= 528.24 kNm
Beams: MAD
= 794.625 kNm
MAB
MAB = MAE = 0.5(528.24 +794.625) = 661.4kNm (INT) ; 330.7kNm (EXT) = 661.4kNm
MAE
= 661.4kNm
Seismic Design
Procedures: A

192
Manual for Summary: divide by 2 frames
Practicing
Engineers
Chapter 9

Step 3:
COLUMN AXIAL LOADS DUE TO SEISMIC FORCES
Overturning moment:
F1h1+F2(h1+h2)
MO = n−1 MO =
177.59 ×3 +352.16 (6)
MO = 3−1
= 1322.87 kNm 1322.87 kNm
MO 1322.87 ×3
PE = L
= 2 ×6
= 330.7 kN

Step 4:
GRAVITY MOMENTS IN BEAMS:
Consider as a continuous beam and use standard tables. Hence from the standard
tables, the moment coefficients for equidistant unit point loads on each span of
an equidistant 2 span beam are:

MD, supp =
WD = 4.1 x (6 /2) x (6/2) = 36.9kN
-83.25kNm
WL = 36.9 x (1.5/4.1) = 13.5 kN
MD, span =
69.08kNm
MD, SUPPORT = -0.188 x 2 x 6 x 36.9= -83.25kNm
ML, supp =
MD, SPAN = 0.156 x 2 x 6 x 36.9= 69.08kNm
-30.45kNm
ML, SUPPORT = -0.188 x 2 x 6 x 13.5 = -30.45kNm
ML, span =
Seismic Design ML, SPAN = 0.561 x 2 x 6 x 13.5 = 25.27kNm
25.27kNm
Procedures: A

193
Manual for Step 5
Practicing GRAVITY MOMENTS IN COLUMNS

Engineers Dead load = 4.1 x 6 = 24.6 kN/m

Live load = 1.5 x 6 = 9 kN/m
Chapter 9

Total OB FEM:
24.6 × 62 (24.6 + 9) × 62
= −
12 12
= 73.8 − 100.8 = −27 kNm

Mupper/lower = FEM x 60% OR 35%

Mupper = 27x0.6 = 16.2kNm
Mlower = 27x0.35 = 9.45Nm

Step 6
GRAVITY AXIAL FORCES IN COLUMNS: 6
Dead = 3x 4.1 x 62 /2 = 221.4 kN
Live = 221.4 x (1.5/4.1) = 81 kN

Step 7
BEAM SIZE
Consider U = 1.4D+0.5L+1.4E
Mu = (1.4 x 83.25) + (0.5 x 30.45) + (1.4 x 330.7) = 594kNm
For ASTM A992 Grade 50
Zreq>M/0.9Fy: Fy=345 Mpa
Zrequired = 594x106/(0.9x345) = 1913cm3 (116.7in3)
Use W14x74
3
Use W14x74 (126>116.7in : OK)
OK

Step 8:
CHECK BEAM LOCAL BUCKLING INSTABILITY (i.e. SEISMIC
COMPACTNESS)
Seismic Design b/2tf = 6.4; λmax = 0.3(E/Fy) = 0.3√(29000/50) = 7.22>6.4 :OK
Procedures: A h/w = 25.3; λmax = 2.45(E/Fy) = 2.45√(29000/50) = 59>25.3 :OK OK

194
Manual for
Practicing Step 9

Engineers CHECK UNBRACED LENGTH OF BEAM FLANGES

Max length = 0.086ryE/Fy = 0.086x2.48x29000/50 = 123.7in = 3124.2mm
Chapter 9
Unbraced length = 3250/2 = 1625 ≮ 3124.2 mm OK
Use W14x74 Use W14x74

Step 10
COLUMN SIZE FOR STRONG-COLUMN-WEAK BEAM (SCWB)
Beam plastic moment strength, Mp = FyZ = 50x126/12= 525 kip-ft
Beam depth = 14.17in
Assume location of beam plastic hinge is 1.6 times beam total depth from the
column center-line, ie.x=1.6db

i.e. Shear force in plastic hinge, Vp = 2Mp/(L-2x) + w(L-2x)/2 =

2 x 525 / (6 x 3.28-2 x 1.6 x 14.17/12) + 1.2(36.9 + 13.5) x 0.3 x
(6 x 3.28-2 x 1.6 x14.17/12) /2
= 210kip (934 kN)

Moment due to Vp (i.e. Mv) = 120 x 1.6 x 14.17 /12 = 167.7 kip-ft
∑Mpb* = ∑ (1.1RyMp + Mv)
1.1 for ASTM A992M
∑Mpb* = 1.1x1.1x 525 + 210 = 845.25 kip-ft
∑Mpc* = ∑ (ZcFyc) = 2Zcx50 = 1.5 x 845.25 x 12 : Zc = 152.15in3 Use W12x120
Use W12x120 (186 > 152.15 in3 : OK) OK

CHECK COLUMN LOCAL BUCKLING: 11

b/2tf = 5.6 ; λmax = 0.3(E/Fy) = 0.3√(29000/50) = 7.22>5.6:OK
h/w = 13.7 ; λmax = 2.45(E/Fy) = 2.45√(29000/50) = 59>13.7 :OK OK

CHECK DRIFT: 12
For beam and column sizes selected
Seismic Design
Beams: W14x74, Ix=796 in4 Columns: W12x120, Ix=1070 in4
Procedures: A

195
Manual for Ib = Ib*=Ib*/L* = ∑Ib/L = (796x0.02544)/6 = 5.52 x10-5
Practicing Ic = Ic* = ∑Ic/h = (2 x 1070 x 0.02544)/3 = 2.97 1x10-4

Engineers Stiffness ratio, VG = (Ib*/L*)/( Ic*/h) = 5.52/29.7 = 0.2 i.e. εG ≅ 1 (Fig. 9.2)
Drift = ∆Ug/hg = Cd(3 εG-1)(∑F)hG2 /(12EIc)
Chapter 9
∑F = 0.1W/no. of frames = 529.75 /2

Cd(3 εG-1)(∑F)hG2 / 12EIc

= [5.5x32 / (12x210x106x(1070x0.02544))] x (0.1x5297.55/2)x100%
= 1.1 % < 2%: OK OK

Step 13
CHECK UNIT EQUATION (COLUMN STRENGTH)
Consider U =1.4D + 0.5L + 1.4E
Pu = 1.4 x 221.4 + 0.5x 81 + 1.4 x 330.7 = 813.44 Kn
λc = 1.1L√(Fy/E)/(π ry)
λc = 1.1x1.22x3.28x12√(50/29000)/(3.14x3.19) = 0.693 : Y=0.4802
Fcr = 0.658Y x Fy = 0.6580.4802 x 50 = 40.9ksi
φPn = 0.8 Fcr A = 0.8x40.9x44.7= 1462.584kip = 6505.9kN
Pu/ φPn = 1331.27/6505.9 = 0.2≥0.2
P/ 2φPn + 8/9[ (Mz/ 0.8Mnz) + (My/ 0.8Mny) ]
Muz = 0.5x10.28 + 1.4x262.78 = 373.03kNm
= 0.21/2 + (8x373.03)/(9x0.8x1.35x1225) = 0.35 < 1 : OK OK

Step 14
NON-SEISMIC BEAMS
Consider U =1.2D + 1.6L
Mu = 1.2x 83.25+ 1.6x30.45= 148.62 kNm
Zrequired = 148.62x106/(0.9x350x103)= 471.8cm3 = 28.79in3
Use W10x30 (36.6>28.79in3 : OK) Use W10x30

Seismic Design
Procedures: A
Manual for

196
Practicing Step 15
Engineers NON-SEISMIC COLUMNS

Chapter 9
Consider U = 1.2D+1.6L
Max moment on internal column, Mu = 1.6x2x9.45 = 30.24kNm
Max axial force on internal column, Pu = 1.2x2x221.4+ 1.6x2x81 =
790.56kN
Effective height = 0.85x3000 = 2550mm = 8.4ft

COST ESTIMATION

CONCRETE:
Concrete for decking for 200mm equivalent thickness = 2x302.4x0.2 = 120.96m3
Footings = Footings (assume 1.8x1.8x0.6) = 15x1.82x0.6 = 29.16m3
TOTAL = 150.12m3

STEELWORK:
Seismic beams = 11x6x3.28x74x0.46= 3992kg
Seismic columns = 6x6x3.28x120x0.46= 2715kg
Non-seismic beams = 15x2x6x3.28x30x0.46=8147kg
Non-seismic columns = 9x6x3.28x99x0.46= 8066kg
Composite beams = 16x2x6x3.28x30x0.46= 8690kg
TOTAL = 31610kg
Composite decking, Composite decking, 20ft long x 25’’ wide =
2x(24x12/25)x12.6x3.28= 952ft
Decking BRC, 610x6ftx100ft=2x24x12.6/(30.5x1.8)= 11 rolls

197
 Table 36: Steel Moment Resisting Framed Health Center

TIME AMOUNT UNIT RATE (TT$) TOTAL (TT$)

Conc. For Decking 150 m3 1,380.00 207,166
Decking 952 ft 22.00 20,944
BRC Decking 11 Nr. Rolls 598.20 6,580
Steelwork 31,610 kg 21.10 666,971
Accessories at 25% 166,743
Blocks (inc mortar) 417,005
Labour for blocks at 65% 271,053
Grade slab 277,633
TOTAL STRUCTURAL 2,034,095
TOTAL SERVICES 4,068,190
TOTAL ARCHITECTURAL 4,068,190
TOTAL STR, SERV, ARCH 10,170,476
Preliminaries at 5% 508,524
Contingency at 15% 1,525,571
CONSTRUCTION COST 12,204,571
OVERHEAD & PROFIT AT 30% 3,051,143
GRAND TOTAL $ 17,289,808.65

198
 Preliminary Structural Design of a Steel SMRF for the Two-Storey, Two Bedroom
Apartment

References Calculations Output

Seismic Design Step 1
Procedures: A SEISMIC LOAD

Manual for
Practicing
Engineers
Chapter 9

From the RC SMRF Two-Storey House Design

Recall:
Building Weight (W) = 1123.58kN
Assuming an increase of 20% of the building weight to cater for connections
1123.58 x 20% = 224.72
Total Building Weight (W) = 1123.58 + 224.72 = 1348.3 kN
Assuming a linear distribution
Seismic Load (V) = 0.1W = 0.1(1348.3) = 134.83 kN
V = F1 + F2
F1 F2 − F1
=
1.2 2.8
As F1 + F2 = V
Therefore, F1 = V – F2
V − F2 F2 − (V − F2)
=
1.2 2.8
1.2 (V- F2) = 2.8 (F2 – V + F2)
4V = 6.8F2
V =134.83
4(134.83) = 6.8F2
F2 = 79.3 kN F1 = 55.53 kN

F1 =55.53 kN F2 = 79.3 kN

Check:
OK

199
 55.53 + 79.3 = 134.83 kN
Seismic Design Step 2
Procedures: A MOMENTS DUE TO SEISMIC LOADS

Manual for
Practicing
Engineers
Chapter 9

Assuming equal spans in the shorter direction

4.9 + 4.9
= 4.9 m
2
Therefore, tributary width = 2 x (0.5 x 4.9) = 4.9 m

Where:
h1 = 2.8 m h2 = 1.2 m ncol = 2

Columns:

First Floor:

79.3 ×2.8
MAC = = 111.02 kNm (INT); 55.51 (EXT)
2

MAC
Second Floor: = 111.02 kNm
MAD
= 80.9 kNm
(55.53+79.3) ×1.2
MAD = = 80.9 kNm (INT); 40.45 (EXT) MAB
2
= 95.96 kNm
Beams: MAE
= 95.96 kNm

Seismic Design MAB = MAE = 0.5(111.02 + 80.9) = 95.96 kNm (INT); 47.98 (EXT)
Procedures: A Summary: divide by 2 frames

200
Manual for
Practicing
Engineers
Chapter 9

Step 3:
COLUMN AXIAL LOADS DUE TO SEISMIC FORCES
Overturning moment:
F1h2+F2(h1+h2)
MO =
n−1
(55.53 x 1.2)+79.3(1.2+2.8) MO =
MO = 3−1
= 191.92kNm
MO 191.92 ×2 191.92 kNm
PE = L
= 2 ×4.9
= 39.17kN

Step 4:
GRAVITY MOMENTS IN BEAMS:

Consider as a continuous beam and use standard tables. Hence from the standard
tables, the moment coefficients for equidistant unit point loads on each span of
an equidistant 2 span beam are:

WD = 4.1 x (4.9 /2) x (4.9/2) = 24.6kN MD, supp =

WL = 24.6 x (1.5/4.1) = 9kN -45.32kNm
MD, span =
MD, SUPPORT = -0.188 x 2 x 4.9 x 24.6= -45.32kNm 37.6kNm
MD, SPAN = 0.156 x 2 x 4.9 x 24.6= 37.6kNm ML, supp =
ML, SUPPORT = -0.188 x 2 x 4.9 x 9 = -16.58Nm -16.58Nm
ML, SPAN = 0.156 x 2 x 4.9 x 9= 13.75kNm ML, span =
13.75kNm
Seismic Design
Procedures: A Step 5

201
Manual for GRAVITY MOMENTS IN COLUMNS
Practicing Dead load = 4.1 x 4.9 = 20.09 kN/m

Engineers Live load = 1.5 x 4.9 = 7.35 kN/m

Chapter 9

Total OB FEM:
20.09 × 4.92 (20.09 + 7.35) × 4.92
= −
12 12
= 40.197 − 54.903 = −14.7 kNm

Mupper/lower = FEM x 60% OR 35%

Mupper = 14.7x0.6 = 8.82kNm
Mlower = 14.7x0.35 = 5.15kNm

Step 6
GRAVITY AXIAL FORCES IN COLUMNS
Dead = 3x 4.1 x 4.92 /2 = 147.66 kN
Live = 147.66 x (1.5/4.1) = 54.02 kN

Step 7
BEAM SIZE
Consider U = 1.4D+0.5L+1.4E
Mu = (1.4 x 45.32) + (0.5 x 16.58) + (1.4 x 47.98) = 138.91kNm
For ASTM A992 Grade 50
Zreq>M/0.9Fy: Fy=345 Mpa
Zrequired = 138.91x106/(0.9x345) = 447.35cm3 (27.29in3)
Use W10x30
Use W10x30 (36.6>27.29in3 : OK)
OK

Step 8:
CHECK BEAM LOCAL BUCKLING INSTABILITY (i.e. SEISMIC
COMPACTNESS)
b/2tf = 5.7; λmax = 0.3(E/Fy) = 0.3√(29000/50) = 7.22>5.7 :OK
Seismic Design h/w = 29.5; λmax = 2.45(E/Fy) = 2.45√(29000/50) = 59>29.5 :OK
OK
Procedures: A Step 9

202
Manual for CHECK UNBRACED LENGTH OF BEAM FLANGES
Practicing Max length = 0.086ryE/Fy = 0.086x1.37x29000/50 = 68.34in = 1735.84mm

Engineers Unbraced length = 3250/2 = 1625 ≮ 1735.84 mm OK

Use W10x30 Use W10x30
Chapter 9

Step 10
COLUMN SIZE FOR STRONG-COLUMN-WEAK BEAM (SCWB)
Beam plastic moment strength, Mp = FyZ = 50x36.6/12= 152.5 kip-ft
Beam depth = 10.47in
Assume location of beam plastic hinge is 1.6 times beam total depth from the
column center-line, ie.x=1.6db

i.e. Shear force in plastic hinge, Vp = 2Mp/(L-2x) + w(L-2x)/2 =

2 x 152.5 / (4.9 x 3.28-2 x 1.6 x 10.47/12) + 1.2(20.09 + 7.35) x 0.3 x
(4.9 x 3.28-2 x 1.6 x10.47/12) /2
= 88.56kip (393.9 kN)

Moment due to Vp (i.e. Mv) = 88.56 x 1.6 x 10.47 /12 = 123.6 kip-ft
∑Mpb* = ∑ (1.1RyMp + Mv)
1.1 for ASTM A992M
∑Mpb* = 1.1x1.1x 152.5 + 123.6 = 308.13 kip-ft
∑Mpc* = ∑ (ZcFyc) = 2Zcx50 = 1.5 x 308.13 x 12 : Zc = 55.5in3 Use W12x45
Use W12x45 (64.7 > 55.5in3 : OK) OK

CHECK COLUMN LOCAL BUCKLING: 11

b/2tf = 7 ; λmax = 0.3(E/Fy) = 0.3√(29000/50) = 7.22>7 :OK
h/w = 29 ; λmax = 2.45(E/Fy) = 2.45√(29000/50) = 59>29 :OK OK

Seismic Design
CHECK DRIFT: 12
Procedures: A

203
Manual for For beam and column sizes selected
Practicing Beams: W10x30, Ix=170 in4 Columns: W12x45, Ix=350 in4

Engineers Ib = Ib*=Ib*/L* = ∑Ib/L = (170x0.02544)/3.25 = 2.18x10-5

Ic = Ic* = ∑Ic/h = (2 x 350 x 0.02544)/1.2 = 2.42x10-4
Chapter 9
Stiffness ratio, VG = (Ib*/L*)/( Ic*/h) = 2.18/24.2 = 0.1 i.e. εG ≅ 1.4 (Fig. 9.2)
Drift = ∆Ug/hg = Cd(3 εG-1)(∑F)hG2 /(12EIc)
∑F = 0.1W/no. of frames = (0.1x1348.3)/2 OK

Cd(3 εG-1)(∑F)hG2 / 12EIc

= [5.5(3x1.4-1)1.22 / (12x210x106x(350x0.02544))] x (0.1x1348.3)/2x100%
= 0.5 % < 2%: OK

Step 13
CHECK UNIT EQUATION (COLUMN STRENGTH)
Consider U =1.4D + 0.5L + 1.4E
Pu = 1.4 x 147.66 + 0.5x 54.02 + 1.4 x 39.1 = 288.47Kn
λc = 1.1L√(Fy/E)/(π ry)
λc = 1.1x1.2x3.28x12√(50/29000)/(3.14x3.19) = 0.693 : Y=0.4802
Fcr = 0.658Y x Fy = 0.6580.4802 x 50 = 40.9ksi
φPn = 0.8 Fcr A = 0.8x40.9x44.7= 1462.584kip = 6505.9kN
Pu/ φPn = 1331.27/6505.9 = 0.2≥0.2
P/ 2φPn + 8/9[ (Mz/ 0.8Mnz) + (My/ 0.8Mny) ]
Muz = 0.5x10.28 + 1.4x262.78 = 373.03kNm
= 0.21/2 + (8x373.03)/(9x0.8x1.35x1225) = 0.35 < 1 : OK OK

Step 14
NON-SEISMIC BEAMS
Consider U =1.2D + 1.6L
Mu = 1.2x 45.3+ 1.6x7.3= 66.04 kNm
Zrequired = 66.04x106/(0.9x350x103)= 209.65cm3 = 12.79in3
Use W10x15 (16>12.79in3 : OK) Use W10x15
Seismic Design
Procedures: A
Manual for Step 15

204
Practicing NON-SEISMIC COLUMNS
Engineers
Chapter 9 Consider U = 1.2D+1.6L
Max moment on internal column, Mu = 1.6x2x5.15 = 16.48kNm
Max axial force on internal column, Pu = 1.2x2x147.66+ 1.6x2x54.02 =
527.25kN
Effective height = 0.85x1220 = 1037mm = 3.4ft

COST ESTIMATION
CONCRETE:
Concrete for decking for 200mm equivalent thickness = 2x79x0.2 = 31.6m3
Footings = Footings (assume 1.8x1.8x0.6) = 9x1.82x0.6 = 17.5m3
TOTAL = 49.1m3

STEELWORK:
Seismic beams = 11x4.9x3.28x30x0.46= 2439kg
Seismic columns = 6x4x3.28x45x0.46= 1629kg
Non-seismic beams = 11x2x4.9x3.28x15x0.46=2439kg
Non-seismic columns = 3x4x3.28x99x0.46= 1792kg
Composite beams = 8x2x4.9x3.28x15x0.46= 1774kg
TOTAL = 10073kg
Composite decking, Composite decking, 20ft long x 25’’ wide =
2x(9.8x12/25)x8x3.28= 246ft
Decking BRC, 610x6ftx100ft=2x9.8x8/(30.5x1.8)= 2 rolls

205
 Table 37: Steel Moment Resisting Framed Two Bedroom Apartment

TIME AMOUNT UNIT RATE (TT$) TOTAL (TT$)

Conc. For Decking 49 m3 1,380.00 67,758
Decking 246 ft 22.00 5,412
BRC Decking 2 Nr. Rolls 598.20 1,196
Steelwork 10,073 kg 21.10 212,540
Accessories at 25% 53,135
Blocks (inc mortar) 9,271
Labour for blocks at 65% 6,026
Grade slab 7,222
TOTAL STRUCTURAL 362,560
TOTAL SERVICES 181,280
TOTAL ARCHITECTURAL 1,015,169
TOTAL STR, SERV, ARCH 1,559,009
Preliminaries at 5% 77,950
Contingency at 15% 233,851
CONSTRUCTION COST 1,870,811
OVERHEAD & PROFIT AT 30% 467,703
GRAND TOTAL $ 2,650,315.98

206
 Preliminary Structural Design of a Reinforced Concrete Framed for the Two-Storey Small
House- Alternative 1

References Calculations Output

Seismic Design Calculating building weight

Procedures: A
Manual for Floor slabs weight
Practicing Floor slab area = 116m2
Engineers Thickness = 0.2m
Chapter 4 Density of concrete = 24kN/m3
Floor slab weight = 24 x 116 x 0.2 = 556.8kN
No. of floor slabs = 2
Therefore, total floor slab weight = 494.4 x 2 = 1113.6kN

Beams weight
No. of beams = 22
Maximum span = 4.7m
Therefore, use beam sizes of 0.3m = b
For d = (4700/26) + 300 = 480.8 = 500mm = 0.5m
Total beam length = (16.1 x 3) + (7.2 x 5) = 84.3 m
No. of floors = 2
Therefore, total beam weight = 24 x 84.3 x 0.5 x 0.3 x 2 = 607kN

Columns weight
Maximum beam span = 4.7m
Therefore, h = 0.3m
No. of columns = 15
Column height = 2.8m
No. of floors = 2
Therefore, total column weight = 24 x 0.3 x 0.3 x 2.8 x 15 x 2 = 181.44kN

207
 Building Weight
Building total weight, W = 1902.04kN
W = 1113.6 + 607 + 181.44 = 1902.04kN

Calculating Vertical Distribution of Seismic Load

Assuming equal spans in the shorter direction

4.4 + 2.1
= 3.25 m
2
Therefore, tributary width = 2 x (0.5 x 3.25) = 3.25 m
Tributary width
= 3.25m.
Typical Internal Frame
Dead load = 4.1 x 3.25 = 13.34 kN/m
Dead load =
Live load = 1.5 x 3.25 = 4.875 kN/m
13.34kN/m
Seismic load, V = 0.1W = 0.1 x 1902.04 = 190.2 kN
Live load =
4.875kN/m
F1 F2 − F1
= V = 190.2kN
1.2 2.8
As F1 + F2 = V
Therefore, F1 = V – F2
V − F2 F2 − (V − F2)
=
1.2 2.8
1.2 (V- F2) = 2.8 (F2 – V + F2)
4V = 6.8F2

208
V =190.2
4(190.2) = 6.8F2
F2 = 112 kN F1 = 78 kN
F1 =78 kN F2 = 112 kN
Moments due to seismic load

Portal Method, for Floor 1

Where:
h1 = 2.8 m
h2 = 1.2 m
ncol = 3

Columns:
First Floor:

112 ×2.8
MAC = = 79 kNm
2(3−1)

Second Floor:

(78+112) ×1.2
MAD = 2(3−1)
= 57 kNm

209
Beams: MAC = 79 kNm
MAD = 57 kNm
MAB = 68 kNm
MAB = MAE = 0.5(79 + 57) = 68 kNm MAE = 68 kNm

Summary: divide by (3-1) frames

Columns

Beams

Column axial loads due to seismic force (shorter direction)

Overturning moment:
F1h1+F2(h1+h2)
Mo =
n−1
(78 x 1.2)+112(1.2+2.8)
Mo = 3−1
= 270.8 kNm

MO = 270.8kNm

210
Pa = Pc

Taking moments about the centreline (CL)

3.25Pc + 3.25Pa = 270.8kNm
Since Pa = Pc
= 3.25Pc + 3.25Pc = 270.8kNm
= 6.5Pc = 270.8 kNm
Therefore, Pc = 270.8/ 6.5 = 41.7Nm Pa = 41.7 kNm
Pb = 0 kNm

Pa = 41.7kNm Pc = 41.7 kNm

Pb = 0kNm
Pc = 41.7kNm

Gravity moments in beams

Consider unit UDL
For equal spans, MG, supp =
−wL2 −3.252 −1.06 kNm MD,
MG, supp = = = −1.06 kNm
10 10
supp =
MG,span = 0.08wL2 = 0.08 × 3.252 = 0.845 kNm
−14.14 kNm MD,
span =
For DL, w = 13.34 kN/m
11.27 kNm
MD, supp = −13.34 × 1.06 = −14.14 kNm
ML, supp =
MD, span = 13.34 × 0.845= 11.27 kNm
−5.17 kNm
ML, span =

211
For LL, w = 4.875 kN/m 4.12 kNm
ML, supp = 4.875 × 1.06 = −5.17 kNm
ML, span = 4.875 × 0.845= 4.12 kNm

Gravity moments in columns

Beams
For non-cantilevers:
4700
h= 26
+ 300 = 500 mm

Since Span < 6000mm

b = 300mm
Therefore:
Beams = 300mm x 500mm
The moment of inertia of a rectangular cross-sectional area can be determined:

I = (300 x 5003)/ 12 = 3.1 x 109 mm4

Columns
Using square columns if building height is 3 stories or less and
If Beam Span < 6000mm,
h = 300m
Columns = 300 x 300
The moment of inertia of a square cross-sectional area can be determined:

212
I = (3004)/ 12 = 6.75 x 108 mm4

3.1 × 109
KB = = 9.5 × 105 mm3
3250
Internal
6.75 × 108 5 3
KU = = 2.4 × 10 mm
2800 Mupper
6.75 × 108
KL = 1200
= 5.6 × 105 mm3 = 0.59 kNm
Mlower
= 1.37 kNm

Internal

Total OB FEM:

13.34 × 3.252 (13.34 + 4.875) × 3.252

= −
12 12
= 11.74 − 16.03 = −4.29 kNm

2.4
Mupper = 4.29 × 9.5+2.4+5.6 = 0.59 kNm
5.6
Mlower = 4.29 × 9.5+2.4+5.6 = 1.37 kNm

External

213
 External:
Mupper
= 2.21 kNm
Total OB FEM:
Mlower
13.34 × 3.252
= = 11.74 kNm = 5.16 kNm
12

2.4
Mupper = 11.74 × 2.4+5.6+4.25 = 2.21 kNm
5.6
Mlower = 11.74 × 2.4+5.6+4.25 = 5.16 kNm

PDL = 95.24 kN
Gravity axial force in columns
PLL = 31.69 kN
Dead load = 2 x 4.1 x 3.252 = 86.6 + (4 x 0.32 x 24) = 95.24 kN
PExtDL
Live load = 2 x 1.5 x 3.252 = 31.69 kN
= 51.94 kN
2
External column dead load = 86.6/2 + (4 x 0.3 x 24) = 51.94 kN

Beam moment (long) rebar

d = 500mm
b = 300mm

Applied moment, Mu
Consider 1.2DL + 0.5LL + E at supports
Support internal joint Mu = (1.2 x 14.14) + (0.5 x 5.17) + 34 = 53.55kNm
Support external joint Mu = (1.2 x 14.14) + (0.5 x 5.17) + 17 = 36.55 kNm

Consider 1.4DL + 1.6LL at span

Span internal joint Mu = 1.4 x 11.27 + 1.6 x 4.12 = 22.37 kNm

214
Internal support rebar
a
MU = 0.9𝐴𝑆 𝑓𝑦 (d – )
2

d = 500 mm, b = 300 mm, cover = 40mm

𝑓𝐶′ = 28 MPa 𝑓𝑦 = 410 MPa,
Use 4 T10 bars
for beam
As ×410
Mu = 0.9As × 410 (500 - 0.85 ×28 ×300 ×2)
internal support
2
Mu = 184500As – 10.59As rebar
6 2
53.55 x 10 = 184500As – 10.59As
10.59As2 - 184500As + 53.55 x 106 = 0
Therefore, As = 295.25 mm2
Use 4T10 bars = 312 mm2

ϕMn = 0.9 x 312 x 410 x (500 – (312 x 410)/ (0.85 x 28 x 300 x 2)) = Use 3 T12 bars
56.53 > 52.55 kNm for beam
Therefore OK external support
rebar
External support rebar
10.59As2 - 184500As + 36.55 x 106 = 0
Therefore, As = 200.4 mm2
Use 3T12 bars = 339 mm2
ϕMn = 0.9 x 339 410 x (500 – (339 x 410)/ (0.85 x 28 x 300 x 2)) =
61.33 > 36.55 Nm Use 2 T10 bars
Therefore OK for beam spans
rebar
Span rebar
10.59As2 - 184500As + 22.37 x 106 = 0
Therefore, As = 122.1 mm2
Use 2T10 bars = 201 mm2

215
ϕMn = 0.9 x 201 x 410 x (500 – (201 x 410)/ (0.85 x 28 x 300 x 2)) =
36.65 > 22.37 kNm
Therefore OK

Summary

Beam Transverse (shear hoops) rebar

W = 1.2 (13.34 + 4.8752) = 21.86kNm

Mpr1 = 312x 1.25 x 410 x (500 – (312x 410)/ 0.85 x 28 x 300 x 2) =
78.5 kNm = Mpr2

216
Shear force in Hinge, S

S = (0.75 x 21.86 x 3.25)/ 2 + (2 x 78.5)/ 3.25 = 74.95 kN

Consider hoops with fyv = 410MPa Use 2T10 bars

Av/s = S/fyvd where S ≈ Vs for beam shear
74.95 x 103/410 x 500 = 0.4 mm hoops rebar

For s = 100mm, Av (2 legs) = 100 x 0.4 = 40mm2

Use 2T10 = 158mm2 > 40mm2
Therefore OK

Column moment rebar

Consider 1.2DL + 0.5LL + E, section = 300mm x 300mm

Applied moments
Internal column, Mu = 0 + 0.5 x 1.37 + 39 = 39.69 kNm
External column, Mu = 1.2 x 5.16 x (13.34) + 0.5 x 5.16 + 19 = 104.18kNm

Applied axial load

Internal column, Pu = 1.2 x 95.24 + 0.5 x 31.69 + 0 = 130.1 kN
External column, Pu = 1.2 x 51.94 + 0.5 x (31.69/ 2) + 41.7 = 112 kN

Design (P, M)
Internal column = 130.1, 39.69 x 1.4 = (130.1, 55.6)

130.1 × 103
Kn = = 0.065
0.8 ×28 ×3002

217
 55.6 ×106
Rn = = 0.09
0.8 ×28 ×3003 Use 8 T16 bars
for internal
column moment
Using the interaction diagram (in Appendix) rebar
ρ = 0.01
As required = 1 x (3002/ 100) = 900 mm2
Use 8T16 = 1608 > 900

External column = 112, 104.18 x 1.4 = (112, 145.85)

112× 103
Kn = = 0.06
0.8 ×28 ×3002

145.85 ×106
Rn = = 0.2
0.8 ×28 ×3003

Use 8 T24 bars

Using the interaction diagram (in Appendix)
for external
ρ = 0.03
column moment
2
As required = 3 x (300 / 100) = 2700 mm2
rebar
Use 8T24 = 3616> 2700

Column Hoops
Use T10 @ 100mm c/c spacing in confinement zone of 0.8m from the top and
Use T10 @
bottom of column, use T10 @ 200mm c/c spacing elsewhere
100mm c/c
spacing in

218
 confinement
zone of 0.8m
from the top
and bottom of
column, use T10
@ 200mm c/c
spacing
elsewhere

Cost Estimation

Concrete:

Slabs = 116m2 x 2 x 0.2 = 46.4m3

Beams = ((84.3) x 2) x 0.3 x 0.5 = 25.29m3

Columns = 15 x 0.3 x 0.3 x 2 x 2.8 = 7.56m3

Footings = 15 × 1.8m × 1.8m × 0.6= 29.16m3

Staircase = 8.4 x 1.0 x 0.3 x 2 = 5m3

TOTAL = 46.4 + 25.29 + 7.56 + 29.16 + 5 = 113.44m

Rebar:

Slab @ 1 tonne/ 12m3 concrete = 45.4/ 12 = 3.78 tonnes

External beams,

T12 bars = [84.3 × (3 × 0.888 kg⁄m) × 2] / 1000 = 0.5 tonnes

T10 bars = [84.3 × (2 × 0.616 kg⁄m) × 2] / 1000 = 0.2 tonnes

219
Internal beams,

T10 bars = [84.3 × (6 × 0.616 kg⁄m) × 2] / 1000 = 0.3 tonnes

Internal columns,

16ϕ bars = (15 × 4m) × (8 × 1.579 kg⁄m)

= 757 kg (0.757 tonnes)

External columns,

24ϕ bars = (15 × 4m) × (8 × 3.85 kg⁄m)

= 1848 kg (1.848 tonnes)

Hoops,

2.6m 2.5m 2.6m 2.5m

10ϕ bars = [[2.8 × 18 × ( + )] + [2.8 × 10 × ( + )]] (0.616)
0.1 0.2 0.1 0.2

= 687.7 kg (0.67 tonnes)

Staircase = 5/ 12 = 0.542 tonnes

Footings:

29.16/12 = 2.43 tonnes

TOTAL = 23 m3

220
Masonry:

Consider 400 x 200 x 150 hollow concrete unreinforced

No. of blocks = (116 x 4)/ 0.4 x 0.2 = 5800 blocks

Mortar = 5800 x (0.1 + 0.1 + 0.4) x 0.15 x 0.012 = 6.26 m3

Cement = 0.25 x 6.26 x 1440/50 = 45 bags

Sand = 0.75 x 6.26 = 4 m3

Grade slab:

Consider 125mm thick and 610 BRC (30.5m x 1.8m)

Concrete = 116 x 0.125 = 14.5m3

BRC = 116/ (30.5 x 1.8) = 3 rolls

Table 38: Showing Cost Estimation of Reinforced Concrete Moment Resisting Framed Small House

Item No. Item Amount Unit Rate Total

1 Structural Concrete 113.44 1380 TT$156,547.20
2 Rebar 23 Tonne 7498 TT$172,454.00
3 Formwork @25% material - TT$82,250.30
4 Labour @65% material - TT$213,850.78
5 Blocks 5800 Number 5.75 TT$33,350.00
6 Cement for blocks 45 Number 53.5 TT$2,407.50
7 Sand for blocks 4 200 TT$800.00
8 Labour for blocks @65% - TT$23,762.38
9 Grade Slab concrete 14.5 1380 TT$15,800.00
10 Grade slab BRC 3 Rolls 449 TT$1,347.00
11 Labour for grade slab @50% - TT$8,573.50

Item Total
Structural Works Subtotal TT$711,142.66
Services TT$711,142.66
Archetectural TT$1,422,285.31
Subtotal TT$2,844,570.62
Preliminaries @5% TT$1,422,285.31
Contingency @15% TT$426,685.59
Construction cost TT$4,693,541.52
Overheard and profit @30 TT$1,408,062.46
Grand total TT$6,101,603.98

221
 Preliminary Structural Design of a Reinforced Concrete Frame for the Two-Storey Health

Center

References Calculations Output

Seismic Design Calculating building weight

Procedures: A
Manual for Floor slabs weight
Practicing Floor slab area = 302.4m2
Engineers Thickness = 0.2m
Chapter 4 Density of concrete = 24kN/m3
Floor slab weight = 24 x 302.4 x 0.2 = 1451.52kN
No. of floor slabs = 2
Therefore, total floor slab weight = 1451.52 x 2 = 2903.04kN

Beams weight
No. of beams = 22
Maximum span = 6m
Therefore, use beam sizes of 0.35m = b
For d = (6000/26) + 300 = 530.77 = 550mm = 0.55m
Total beam length = (24 x 3) + (12.6 x 5) = 135m
No. of floors = 2
Therefore, total beam weight = 24 x 135 x 0.55 x 0.35 x 2 = 1247kN

Columns weight
Maximum beam span = 6m
Therefore, h = 0.35m
No. of columns = 15
Column height = 3m
No. of floors = 2
Therefore, total column weight = 24 x 0.35 x 0.35 x 3 x 15 x 2 = 264.6kN

222
Building total weight, W Building Weight
W = 2903.04 + 1247 + 264.6 = 4414.64kN = 4414.64kN

Calculating Vertical Distribution of Seismic Load

Assuming equal spans in the shorter direction

6+6
=6m Tributary width
2
Therefore, tributary width = 2 x (0.5 x 6) = 6 m = 6 m.

Typical Internal Frame Dead load =

Dead load = 4.1 x 6 = 24.6 kN/m 24.6 kN/m

Live load = 1.5 x 6 = 9 kN/m Live load =

Seismic load, V = 0.1W = 0.1 x 4414.64= 441.5 kN 9 kN/m

V = 441.5 kN
F1 F2 − F1
=
3 3
As F1 + F2 = V
Therefore, F1 = V – F2

223
V − F2 F2 − (V − F2)
=
3 3
3 (V- F2) = 3 (F2 – V + F2)
6V = 9F2
V =441.5 kN
F1 = 147.2 kN
6(441.5) = 9F2
F2 = 294.3 kN
F2 = 294.3 kN
F1 =147.2 kN
Moments due to seismic load

Portal Method, for Floor 1

Where:
h1 = 3 m
h2 = 3 m
ncol = 3

Columns:
First Floor:

294.3 ×3
MAC = 2(3−1)
= 220.73 kNm

Second Floor:

224
 (147.2+294.3) ×3
MAD = 2(3−1)
= 331.13 kNm MAC = 221 kNm
MAD = 331 kNm
Beams: MAB = 276 kNm
MAE = 276 kNm

MAB = MAE = 0.5(220.73 + 331.13) = 275.93 kNm

Summary: divide by (3-1) frames

Columns

Beams

Column axial loads due to seismic force (shorter direction)

Overturning moment:
F1h1+F2(h1+h2)
Mo = n−1 MO =
1103.7 kNm

225
 (147.2 x 3)+294.3(6)
Mo = 3−1
= 1103.7 kNm

Pa = Pc

Taking moments about the centreline (CL)

6Pc + 6Pa = 1103.7 kNm
Since Pa = Pc
= 6Pc + 6Pc =1103.7 kNm
= 12Pc = 1103.7 kNm
Therefore, Pc = 1103.7/12 = 91.98Nm
Pa = 91.98Nm

Pa = 91.98Nm Pb = 0kNm

Pb = 0kNm Pc = 91.98Nm

Pc = 91.98Nm

Gravity moments in beams

Consider unit UDL
For equal spans,
−wL2 −62 MG, supp =
MG, supp = 10
= 10
= −3.6 kNm
−3.6 kNmMD,
MG,span = 0.08wL2 = 0.08 × 62 = 2.88 kNm
MD, supp =
−88.56 kNm MD,
For DL, w = 24.6 kN/m
span =
MD, supp = −24.6 ×3.6 = −88.56 kNm
70.85 kNm

226
MD, span = 24.6 × 2.88 = 70.85 kNm ML, supp =
−32.4 kNm ML,
For LL, w = 9 kN/m span =

ML, supp = −9 × 3.6 = −32.4 kNm 25.92 kNm

ML, span = 9 × 2.88 = 25.92 kNm

Gravity moments in columns

Beams
For non-cantilevers:
6000
h= 26
+ 300 = 550 mm

Since Span is 6000mm

b = 350mm
Therefore:
Beams = 350mm x 550mm
The moment of inertia of a rectangular cross-sectional area can be determined:

I = (350 x 5503)/ 12 = 4.85 x 109 mm4

Columns
Using square columns if building height is 3 stories or less and
If Beam Span is 6000mm,
h = 350m
Columns = 350 x 350
The moment of inertia of a square cross-sectional area can be determined:

I = (3504)/ 12 = 1.25 x 109 mm4

4.85 × 109
KB = = 8.1 × 105 mm3
6000

227
 1.25 × 109
KU = 3000
= 4.2 × 105 mm3
1.25 × 109
KL = = 4.2 × 105 mm3
3000

Internal

Internal
Mupper
= 6.9 kNm
Mlower
Total OB FEM:
= 6.9 kNm

24.6 × 62 (24.6 + 9) × 62
= −
12 12
= 73.8 − 100.8 = −27 kNm

4.2
Mupper = 27 × 8.1+4.2+4.2 = 6.9 kNm
4.2
Mlower = 27 × 8.1+4.2+4.2 = 6.9 kNm

External

228
Total OB FEM:
24.6 × 62
= = 73.8 kNm
12

4.2
Mupper = 73.8 × 4.05+4.2+4.2 = 24.9 kNm
4.2
Mlower = 73.8 × 4.05+4.2+4.2 = 24.9 kNm

Gravity axial force in columns

Dead load = 2 x 4.1 x 62 = 295.2 + (6 x 0.352 x 24) = 312.84 kN
Live load = 2 x 1.5 x 62 = 108 kN
External column dead load = 295.2 /2 + (6 x 0.352 x 24) = 165.24 kN External:
Mupper

Beam moment (long) rebar = 24.9 kNm

d = 550mm Mlower

b = 350mm = 24.9 kNm

Applied moment, Mu
Consider 1.2DL + 0.5LL + E at supports
Support internal joint Mu = (1.2 x 88.56) + (0.5 x 32.4) + 138 = 260.5kNm
Support external joint Mu = (1.2 x 88.56) + (0.5 x 32.4) + 69 = 191.5 kNm PDL = 312.84 kN

Consider 1.4DL + 1.6LL at span PLL = 108 kN

Span internal joint Mu = 1.4 x 70.85 + 1.6 x 25.92= 140.7 kNm PExtDL
= 165.24 kN

Internal support rebar

a
MU = 0.9𝐴𝑆 𝑓𝑦 (d – )
2

d = 550 mm, b = 350 mm, cover = 40mm

𝑓𝐶′ = 28 MPa 𝑓𝑦 = 410 MPa,

As ×410
Mu = 0.9As × 410 (550 - 0.85 ×28 ×350 ×2)

229
Mu = 202950As – 9.08As2
260.5 x 106 = 202950As – 9.08As2
9.08As2- 202950As + 260.5 x 106 = 0
Therefore, As = 1364.4 mm2
Use 5T20 bars = 1570 mm2

ϕMn = 0.9 x 1570 x 410 x (550 – (1570 x 410)/ (0.85 x 28 x 350 x 2)) =
296.2 > 260.5 kNm
Therefore OK

External support rebar Use 5 T20 bars

9.08As2- 202950As + 191.5 x 106 = 0 for beam
Therefore, As = 987.2 mm2 internal support
Use 4T20 bars = 1256 mm2 rebar
ϕMn = 0.9 x 1256 410 x (550 – (1256 x 410)/ (0.85 x 28 x 350 x 2)) =
240.5 > 191.5 Nm
Therefore OK Use 4 T20 bars
for beam
Span rebar external support
9.08As2- 202950As + 140.7 x 106 = 0 rebar
Therefore, As = 716.22 mm2
Use 4T16 bars = 804 mm2
ϕMn = 0.9 x 804 x 410 x (550 – (804 x 410)/ (0.85 x 28 x 350 x 2)) =
157.3 > 140.7 kNm
Therefore OK
Use 4 T16 bars
Summary for beam spans
rebar

230
Beam Transverse (shear hoops) rebar

W = 1.2 (24.6+ 9) = 40.32kNm

Mpr1 = 1570 1.25 x 410 x (550 – (1570 x 410)/ 0.85 x 28 x 350 x 2) =
411 kNm = Mpr2

Shear force in Hinge, S

S = (0.75 x 40.32 x 6)/ 2 + (2 x 411)/ 6 = 227 kN

231
Consider hoops with fyv = 410MPa
Av/s = S/fyvd where S ≈ Vs
227 x 103/410 x 550 = 1 mm

For s = 100mm, Av (2 legs) = 100 x 1 = 100mm2

Use 2T10 = 158mm2 > 100mm2
Therefore OK

Column moment rebar

Consider 1.2DL + 0.5LL + E, section = 350mm x 350mm
Use 2T10 bars
Applied moments for beam shear
Internal column, Mu = 0 + 0.5 x 6.9+ 110 = 113.5 kNm hoops rebar
External column, Mu = 1.2 x 24.9 x 24.6/(24.6 + 9)/ + 0.5 x 24.9 + 55 = 89.3kNm

Applied axial load

Internal column, Pu = 1.2 x 312.8 + 0.5 x 108 + 0 = 429.36 kN
External column, Pu = 1.2 x 165.24 + 0.5 x (108/ 2) + 91.98 = 317.27 kN

Design (P, M)
Internal column = 429.36, 113.5 x 1.4 = (429.36, 158.9)

429.36 × 103
Kn = = 0.16
0.8 ×28 ×3502

158.9 ×106
Rn = = 0.16
0.8 ×28 ×3503

Using the interaction diagram (in Appendix)

232
ρ = 0.01
As required = 1 x (3002/ 100) = 900 mm2
Use 8T16 = 1608 > 900

External column = 317.27, 89.3 x 1.4 = (317.27, 125) Use 8 T16 bars
for internal
column moment
rebar
317.27× 103
Kn = = 0.12
0.8 ×28 ×3502

125 ×106
Rn = = 0.13
0.8 ×28 ×3503

Using the interaction diagram (in Appendix)

ρ = 0.01
As required = 1 x (3002/ 100) = 900 mm2
Use 8T16 = 1608 > 900

Column Hoops
Use T10 @ 100mm c/c spacing in confinement zone of 0.8m from the top and
bottom of column, use T10 @ 200mm c/c spacing elsewhere

Use 8 T16 bars

for external
column moment
rebar

233
 Use T10 @
100mm c/c
spacing in
3000-200/2 800
=2900 confinement

130 zone of 0.8m

from the top
0
and bottom of
800 column, use T10
@ 200mm c/c
spacing
elsewhere

Cost estimate

Concrete:

Slabs = 2 × (302.4) × 0.2m

= 120.96 m3

Footings = 15 × 1.8m × 1.8m × 0.6m

= 29.16 m3

Beams = ((135) x 2) x 0.3 x 0.5 = 40.5m3

Columns = 15 x 0.3 x 0.3 x 2 x 3 = 8.1m3

Staircase = 8.4 x 1.0 x 0.3 x 2 = 5m3

Total = 203.72 m3

Rebar:

234
 120.96
Slabs @ 1 tonne⁄12 m3 concrete = = 10.08 tonnes
12

External beams,

20ϕ bars = [(24m × 2) + (12.6m × 2)] × (4 × 2.46 kg⁄m) × 2

= 1440.5 kg (1.44 tonnes)

16ϕ bars = [(24m × 2) + (12.6m × 2)] × (4 × 1.579 kg⁄m) × 2

= 924 kg (0.924 tonnes)

Total = 2.36 tonnes

Internal beams,

25ϕ bars = [(24m × 2) + (12.6m × 5)] × (8 × 3.982 kg⁄m) × 2

= 7072 kg (7.07tonnes)

25ϕ bars = [(24 × 2) + (12.6m × 5)] × (6 × 3.982 kg⁄m) × 2

= 5304 kg (5.3 tonnes)

Total = 21.07 tonnes

External columns,

20ϕ bars = (28 × 9m) × (8 × 2.47 kg⁄m)

= 4979.5 kg (4.98 tonnes)

External columns,

25ϕ bars = (28 × 9m) × (8 × 3.85 kg⁄m)

= 7761.6 kg (7.76 tonnes)

235
Hoops,

2.6m 2.5m 2.6m 2.5m

16ϕ bars = [[4 × 18 × ( + )] + [4 × 10 × ( + )]] (1.56)
0.1 0.2 0.1 0.2

= 6726.7 kg (6.7 tonnes)

54
Footing = = 4.5 tonnes
12

Total = 39 tonnes

Masonry:

Consider 400 x 200 x 150 hollow concrete unreinforced

No. of blocks = (302.4 x 6)/ 0.4 x 0.2 = 22680 blocks

Mortar = 22680x (0.1 + 0.1 + 0.4) x 0.15 x 0.012 = 24.49 m3

Cement = 0.25 x 24.49 x 1440/50 = 176 bags

Sand = 0.75 x 24.49 = 18.36 m3

Grade slab:

Consider 125mm thick and 610 BRC (30.5m x 1.8m)

Concrete = 302.46 x 0.125 = 37.8m3

BRC = 302.4/ (30.5 x 1.8) = 6 rolls

236
 Table 39: Cost Estimation of Reinforced Concrete Moment Resisting Framed Health Center

Item No. Item Amount Unit Rate Total

1 Structural Concrete 203.72 1380 TT$281,133.60
2 Rebar 39 Tonne 7498 TT$292,422.00
3 Formwork @25% material - TT$143,388.90
4 Labour @65% material - TT$372,811.14
5 Blocks 22680 Number 5.75 TT$130,410.00
6 Cement for blocks 176 Number 53.5 TT$9,416.00
7 Sand for blocks 18.36 200 TT$3,672.00
8 Labour for blocks @65% - TT$93,273.70
9 Grade Slab concrete 37.8 1380 TT$15,800.00
10 Grade slab BRC 6 Rolls 449 TT$2,694.00
11 Labour for grade slab @50% - TT$9,247.00

Item Total
Structural Works Subtotal TT$1,354,268.34
Services TT$1,354,268.34
Archetectural TT$2,708,536.68
Subtotal TT$5,417,073.36
Preliminaries @5% TT$2,708,536.68
Contingency @15% TT$812,561.00
Construction cost TT$8,938,171.04
Overheard and profit @30 TT$2,681,451.31
Grand total TT$11,619,622.36

237
 Preliminary Structural Design of a Reinforced Concrete Frame for the Two-Storey

Apartment

References Calculations Output

Seismic Design Calculating building weight

Procedures: A
Manual for Floor slabs weight
Practicing Floor slab area = 79m2
Engineers Thickness = 0.2m
Chapter 4 Density of concrete = 24kN/m3
Floor slab weight = 24 x 79 x 0.2 = 379.2kN
No. of floor slabs = 2
Therefore, total floor slab weight = 379.2.4 x 2 = 758.4kN

Beams weight
No. of beams = 12
Maximum span = 4.9m
Therefore, use beam sizes of 0.3m = b
For d = (4900/26) + 300 = 488.5 = 500mm = 0.5m
Total beam length = (9.8 x 2) + (8 x 2) = 35.6 m
No. of floors = 2
Therefore, total beam weight = 24 x 35.6 x 0.5 x 0.3 x 2 = 256.32kN

Columns weight
Maximum beam span = 4.9m
Therefore, h = 0.3m
No. of columns = 9
Column height = 2.8m
No. of floors = 2
Therefore, total column weight = 24 x 0.3 x 0.3 x 2.8 x 9 x 2 = 108.86kN

238
Building total weight, W
W = 758.4 + 256.32 + 108.86 = 1123.58kN Building Weight
= 1123.58kN

Calculating Vertical Distribution of Seismic Load

Assuming equal spans in the shorter direction

4.9 + 4.9
= 4.9 m Tributary width
2
Therefore, tributary width = 2 x (0.5 x 4.9) = 4.9 m = 4.9m.

Typical Internal Frame

Dead load = 4.1 x 4.9 = 20.09 kN/m Dead load =
Live load = 1.5 x 4.9 = 7.35 kN/m 20.09kN/m
Seismic load, V = 0.1W = 0.1 x 1123.58= 112.36 kN Live load =
7.35kN/m
F1 F2 − F1 V = 112.36kN
=
1.2 2.8
As F1 + F2 = V
Therefore, F1 = V – F2
V − F2 F2 − (V − F2)
=
1.2 2.8

239
1.2 (V- F2) = 2.8 (F2 – V + F2)
4V = 6.8F2
V =112.36
4(112.36) = 6.8F2
F2 = 66.09 kN F1 = 46.27 kN
F1 =46.27 kN F2 = 66.09 kN
Moments due to seismic load

Portal Method, for Floor 1

Where:
h1 = 2.8 m
h2 = 1.2 m
ncol = 3

Columns:
First Floor:

66.09 ×2.8
MAC = = 46.26 kNm
2(3−1)

Second Floor:

240
 (46.27+66.09) ×1.2
MAD = 2(3−1)
= 33.71 kNm

MAC = 47 kNm
Beams:
MAD = 34 kNm
MAB = 40 kNm

MAB = MAE = 0.5(46.26 + 33.71) = 39.68 kNm MAE = 40 kNm

Summary: divide by (3-1) frames

Columns

Beams

Column axial loads due to seismic force (shorter direction)

Overturning moment:
F1h1+F2(h1+h2)
Mo = MO = 160 kNm
n−1

241
 (46.27 x 1.2)+66.09(1.2+2.8)
Mo = 3−1
= 159.9 kNm

Pa = Pc

Taking moments about the centreline (CL)

4.9Pc + 4.9Pa = 160kNm
Since Pa = Pc
= 4.9Pc + 4.9Pc = 160kNm
= 9.8Pc = 160 kNm
Therefore, Pc = 160/ 9.8 = 16.34kNm
Pa = 16.34kNm

Pa = 16.34kNm Pb = 0 kNm

Pb = 0kNm Pc = 16.34kNm

Pc = 16.34kNm

Gravity moments in beams

Consider unit UDL
For equal spans,
−wL2 −4.92 MG, supp =
MG, supp = 10
= 10
= −2.4 kNm
-2.4 kNmMD,
MG,span = 0.08wL2 = 0.08 × 4.92 = 1.92 kNm
MD, supp =
−48.22 kNm
For DL, w = 20.09 kN/m
MD, span =
MD, supp = −20.09 × 2.4 = −48.22 kNm
38.57 kNm ML,
MD, span = 20.09 × 1.92= 38.57 kNm
supp =

242
 −17.64 kNm ML,
For LL, w = 7.35 kN/m span =
ML, supp = −7.35 × 2.4 = −17.64 kNm 14.11 kNm
ML, span = 7.35 × 1.92 = 14.11 kNm

Gravity moments in columns

Beams
For non-cantilevers:
4900
h= 26
+ 300 = 500 mm

Since Span < 6000mm

b = 300mm
Therefore:
Beams = 300mm x 500mm
The moment of inertia of a rectangular cross-sectional area can be determined:

I = (300 x 5003)/ 12 = 3.1 x 109 mm4

Columns
Using square columns if building height is 3 stories or less and
If Beam Span < 6000mm,
h = 300m
Columns = 300 x 300
The moment of inertia of a square cross-sectional area can be determined:

243
I = (3004)/ 12 = 6.75 x 108 mm4
3.1 × 109
KB = 4900
= 6.3 × 105 mm3
6.75 × 108
KU = 2800
= 2.4 × 105 mm3
6.75 × 108
KL = 1200
= 5.6 × 105 mm3

Internal

Total OB FEM:

20.09 × 4.92 (20.09 + 7.35) × 4.92

= −
12 12
= 40.197 − 54.903 = −14.7 kNm

2.4
Mupper = 14.7 × 6.3+2.4+5.6 = 2.5 kNm
5.6 Internal
Mlower = 14.7 × 6.3+2.4+5.6 = 5.8 kNm
Mupper
=2.5 kNm
External
Mlower

244
 =5.8 kNm

Total OB FEM:
20.09 × 4.92
= = 40.2 kNm
12

2.4
Mupper = 40.2 × 2.4+5.6+3.15 = 8.65 kNm
5.6
Mlower = 40.2 × 2.4+5.6+3.15 = 20.19 kNm

Gravity axial force in columns

External:
Dead load = 2 x 4.1 x 4.92 = 196.88 + (4 x 0.32 x 24) = 205.5 kN
Mupper
Live load = 2 x 1.5 x 4.92 = 72.03 kN
= 8.65 kNm
2
External column dead load = 196.88/2 + (4 x 0.3 x 24) = 107.08 kN
Mlower
= 20.19 kNm
Beam moment (long) rebar
d = 500mm
b = 300mm
PDL = 205.5 kN
PLL = 72.03 kN
Applied moment, Mu
PExtDL
Consider 1.2DL + 0.5LL + E at supports
= 107.08 kN
Support internal joint Mu = (1.2 x 48.22) + (0.5 x 17.64) + 20 = 86.7kNm
Support external joint Mu = (1.2 x 48.22) + (0.5 x 17.64) + 10 = 76.7kNm
Consider 1.4DL + 1.6LL at span

245
Span internal joint Mu = 1.4 x 48.22 + 1.6 x 17.64 = 95.7 kNm

Internal support rebar

a
MU = 0.9𝐴𝑆 𝑓𝑦 (d – )
2

d = 500 mm, b = 300 mm, cover = 40mm

𝑓𝐶′ = 28 MPa 𝑓𝑦 = 410 MPa,

As ×410
Mu = 0.9As × 410 (500 - )
0.85 ×28 ×300 ×2

Mu = 184500As – 10.59As2
86.7 x 106 = 184500As – 10.59As2
10.59As2 - 184500As + 86.7 x 106 = 0
Therefore, As = 483.33 mm2
Use 5T12 bars = 565 mm2

ϕMn = 0.9 x 565 x 410 x (500 – (565 x 410)/ (0.85 x 28 x 300 x 2)) =
100.9 > 86.7 kNm Use 5 T12 bars
Therefore OK for beam
internal support
External support rebar rebar
2 6
10.59As - 184500As + 76.7 x 10 = 0
Therefore, As = 426.14 mm2
Use 6T10 bars = 468 mm2
ϕMn = 0.9 x 468 410 x (500 – (468 x 410)/ (0.85 x 28 x 300 x 2)) =
84.02 > 76.7 Nm
Therefore OK Use 6 T10 bars
for beam
Span rebar external support
2 6
10.59As - 184500As + 95.7 x 10 = 0 rebar
2
Therefore, As = 535.14 mm

246
Use 3T16 bars = 603 mm2
ϕMn = 0.9 x 603 x 410 x (500 – (603 x 410)/ (0.85 x 28 x 300 x 2)) =
107.4 > 95.7 kNm
Therefore OK
Use 3 T16 bars
Summary for beam spans
rebar

Beam Transverse (shear hoops) rebar

W = 1.2 (20.09 + 7.35) = 32.93kNm

Mpr1 = 565 x 1.25 x 410 x (500 – (565 x 410)/ 0.85 x 28 x 300 x 2) =
140 kNm = Mpr2

247
Shear force in Hinge, S

S = (0.75 x 32.93 x 4.9)/ 2 + (2 x 140)/ 4.9 = 117.65 kN

Consider hoops with fyv = 410MPa

Av/s = S/fyvd where S ≈ Vs
117.65 x 103/410 x 500 = 0.6 mm

For s = 100mm, Av (2 legs) = 100 x 0.6 = 60mm2

Use 2T10 = 158mm2 > 60mm2
Therefore OK

Column moment rebar

Consider 1.2DL + 0.5LL + E, section = 300mm x 300mm

Applied moments Use 2T10 bars

Internal column, Mu = 0 + 0.5 x 5.8 + 23 = 25.9 kNm for beam shear
External column, Mu = 1.2 x (20.09) + 0.5 x 20.19 + 11 = 307.83kNm hoops rebar

Applied axial load

Internal column, Pu = 1.2 x 205.5 + 0.5 x 72.03 + 0 = 282.6 kN
External column, Pu = 1.2 x 107.08 + 0.5 x (72.03/ 2) + 16.34 = 162.8 kN

Design (P, M)
Internal column = 282.6, 25.9 x 1.4 = (282.6, 36.26)

282.6 × 103
Kn = = 0.1
0.8 ×28 ×3002

248
 36.26 ×106
Rn = = 0.06
0.8 ×28 ×3003

Using the interaction diagram (in Appendix)

ρ = 0.01
As required = 1 x (3002/ 100) = 900 mm2
Use 8T16 = 1608 > 900
External column = 162.8, 307.83x 1.4 = (162.8, 430.9)

162.8× 103
Kn = = 0.08
0.8 ×28 ×3002 Use 8 T16 bars
for internal
column moment
430.9 ×106 rebar
Rn = = 0.3
0.8 ×28 ×3003

Using the interaction diagram (in Appendix)

ρ = 0.03
As required = 3 x (3002/ 100) = 2700 mm2
Use 8T24 = 3616> 2700

Column Hoops
Use T10 @ 100mm c/c spacing in confinement zone of 0.8m from the top and
bottom of column, use T10 @ 200mm c/c spacing elsewhere

249
Use 8 T24 bars
for external
column moment
rebar

Use T10 @
100mm c/c
spacing in
confinement
zone of 0.8m
from the top
and bottom of
column, use T10
@ 200mm c/c
spacing
elsewhere

250
COST ESTIMATION

Concrete:

Slabs = 79m2 x 2 x 0.2 = 31.6m3

Beams = ((35.5) x 2) x 0.3 x 0.5 = 10.65m3

Columns = 9 x 0.3 x 0.3 x 2 x 2.8 = 4.5m3

Footings = 9 × 1.8m × 1.8m × 0.6= 29.16m3

Staircase = 8.4 x 1.0 x 0.3 x 2 = 5m3

TOTAL = 31.6 + 10.65 + 4.5 + 29.16 + 5 = 80.9m

TOTAL Rebar = 14m3

Masonry:

Consider 400 x 200 x 150 hollow concrete unreinforced

No. of blocks = (79 x 4)/ 0.4 x 0.2 =3950 blocks

Mortar = 3950 x (0.1 + 0.1 + 0.4) x 0.15 x 0.012 = 5 m3

Cement = 0.25 x 5. x 1440/50 = 36 bags

Sand = 0.75 x 5 = 3.75 m3

Grade slab:

Consider 125mm thick and 610 BRC (30.5m x 1.8m)

Concrete = 79 x 0.125 = 9.875 m3

BRC = 79/ (30.5 x 1.8) = 2 rolls

251
Table 40: Cost Estimation of Reinforced Concrete Moment Resisting Framed Two Bedroom Apartment

Item No. Item Amount Unit Rate Total

1 Structural Concrete 80.9 1380 TT$111,642.00
2 Rebar 14 Tonne 7498 TT$104,972.00
3 Formwork @25% material - TT$54,153.50
4 Labour @65% material - TT$140,799.10
5 Blocks 3950 Number 5.75 TT$22,712.50
6 Cement for blocks 36 Number 53.5 TT$1,926.00
7 Sand for blocks 3.75 200 TT$750.00
8 Labour for blocks @65% - TT$16,502.53
9 Grade Slab concrete 9.875 1380 TT$15,800.00
10 Grade slab BRC 2 Rolls 449 TT$898.00
11 Labour for grade slab @50% - TT$8,349.00

Item Total
Structural Works Subtotal TT$478,504.63
Services TT$478,504.63
Archetectural TT$957,009.25
Subtotal TT$1,914,018.50
Preliminaries @5% TT$957,009.25
Contingency @15% TT$287,102.78
Construction cost TT$3,158,130.53
Overheard and profit @30 TT$947,439.16
Grand total TT$4,105,569.68

252
6.0 HEALTH AND SAFETY

The Occupational Health and Safety Act (2004) outlines all possible hazards, health concerns and

risks to all human life. This act encompasses works that would be done before construction begins,

during the construction period and even after construction has concluded. The construction site

must have an official, certified in OSH to ensure all works on the site are done in a safe manner

for persons on and off site.

Pre-construction:

When establishing a construction site, it is important to locate a safe environment, away from the

actual construction to designate a Muster Point. The muster point must be clear of any falling

debris and left free with no objects hindering it in the case of an emergency. Signage must also be

placed all through a site, most notably, the muster point sign, as well as the PPE sign, signalling

the Personal Protection Equipment that must be worn to enter and work on that site. Works

conducted near the road should have “Road works ahead” signs as well as “Heavy/Long equipment

turning” to alert pedestrians and drivers that they are entering a construction zone.

During Construction:

During construction, the site is the most hazardous, due to the pace and nature of works the

construction site becomes a dangerous place. The most important part of OSH is the use of proper

personal protection equipment (PPE) such as hardhats, steel toe shoes, earmuffs, safety glasses

and a high visibility vest. This ensures that in the event something does happen, damage is

significantly reduced or completely mitigated. The employment of safety practices is dependent

on works being done, for instant exposed steel should be covered to prevent damage, drains and

open trenches should be covered or taped off, debris should be moved and centralized. Site

253
maintenance is required to ensure health and safety is practised. Loose sand should be wet to

prevent being airborne, hoarding should be constructed to keep the site from affecting the health

and safety of the public and routine garbage disposal should be conducted to ensure vectors are

not attracted to the site. It is of utmost importance that the OSH authority on site ensures this

standard is upkept for the safety of the site.

Post Construction:

Upon completion of the site, it is required that the site be toughly cleaned, removing all debris and

excess materials. The signage, hoarding and all associated buildings must be removed and secured

before the site is left. A community evacuation route should be established and muster points where

necessary.

7.0 CONCLUSION

In conclusion the feasibility analysis was successfully carried out and several alternatives were

pitted against each other and the better options chosen through the application of several multi

criteria analysis. This allowed the options to be more efficiently chosen from a variety of important

factors apart from just a simple costing perspective. In some instances, although an alternative was

more expensive it was not chosen due to the overall combined effect of several factor. This report

looked at the selection of a site, layout, pavement, structural systems, potable water and waste

water management as well as several other factors. In the trinity area the group was faced with

several issues and given the stipulations and considerations to be made came up with the plan and

design for a housing development for 500 individuals. In light of transport a flexible pavement

254
design was selected. For drainage a HDPE drain was selected over concrete and in terms of

structures some building were more efficient when built in steel and some in reinforced concrete.

In terms of pricing the total for the project using the RC structural design was summed to a total

of TT$1,138,539,480.04 while that of steel structures was TT$1,013,406,346.20.

255
8.0 REFERENCES

Asphalt, VA. "Structural Design Methods." https://vaasphalt.org/pavement-guide/structural-

design/structural-design-methods/.
Britannica, The Editors of. 2015. "Pavement." https://www.britannica.com/technology/pavement-
civil-engineering.
Coast, Green. 2019. "Solar Street Lights Overview: How they work and who provides them?".
https://greencoast.org/solar-street-lights/#:~:text=%20Advantages%20of%20solar-
powered%20street%20lights%20%201,canopy%20lighting%20operates%20off-
grid,%20the%20solar-powered...%20More.
KUGLER. 1961. "Geological Map of Trinidad." researchgate.net.
Mathew, Prof. Tom V. 2009. "Introduction to pavement design."
https://www.civil.iitb.ac.in/tvm/1100_LnTse/401_lnTse/plain/plain.html#:~:text=Conven
tional%20flexible%20pavements%20are%20layered,on%20the%20soil%20sub%2Dgrad
e.
TTMS, Trinidad and Tobago Meteorological Service. 2021. "Weather and Climate."
metoffice.gov.tt.

Appendix C. Pdf File.

https://www.waterboards.ca.gov/water_issues/programs/stormwater/storms/docs/appendix_c_co
st_estimate.pdf

“2011 Census Data.” Central Statistical Office. Accessed February 5, 2021.

https://cso.gov.tt/census/2011-census-data/.

“Budget Costs - Wastewater Treatment Plant Cost.” Package Plants. Accessed February 5, 2021.
https://packageplants.com/budget-costs/.

“Corrugated Sewage Pipe Here: Best Price & Best Quality Page 2.”
https://www.kuzeyborugroup.com/. Accessed February 5, 2021.
https://www.kuzeyborugroup.com/corrugated-sewage-pipe?ps=2.

256
“Manning's Roughness Coefficients.” Engineering ToolBox. Accessed February 5, 2021.
https://www.engineeringtoolbox.com/mannings-roughness-d_799.html.

Second. Plainwater, March 6, 2018. https://plainwater.com/water/mannings-

equation/#:~:text=where:%201%20k%20=%201.49%20(US%20Customary%20units),S%
20is%20the%20longitudinal%20slope%20(feet/feet%20or%20meters/meters).

“Materials Used for Construction of Sewer: Sewage: Sanitary Engineering.” Engineering Notes
India, April 21, 2017. https://www.engineeringenotes.com/sanitary-engineering/materials-
used-for-construction-of-sewer-sewage-sanitary-engineering/17122.

“Building a Strong Network With a Storm Water System.” Storm Water Solutions. Accessed
February 5, 2021. https://www.estormwater.com/retention-systems/building-strong-
network-storm-water-system.

257