Reinforced Concrete Design of A 5 Storey Seminary Main Building

TECHNOLOGICAL INSTITUTE OF THE PHILIPPINES
938 Aurora Boulevard Cubao, Quezon City
A Project in Partial Fulfilment for the Requirements in
CE473
(REINFORCED CONCRETE DESIGN)
Entitled as
A DESIGN OF A FIVE STOREY REINFORCED CONCRETE

SEMINARY MAIN BUILDING
Submitted by
LAZO, EMMANUEL M.
Submitted to
Engr. Rhonnie C. Estores
October, 2015
APPROVAL SHEET
The design project entitled A Design of a Reinforced Concrete Seminary Main Building prepared by
Emmanuel M. Lazo of the Civil Engineering Department was examined and evaluated by designer himself,
and is hereby recommended for approval.
Engr. Rhonnie Estores

Adviser
ABSTRACT
This project is entitled as A Design of a Five Storey Reinforced Concrete Seminary Main Building
is presented by Emmanuel M. Lazo, as partial fulfillment for the requirements for CE 473 (Reoinforced
Concrete Design.
The project was about structural analysis and design of identified parts of a five storey reinforced
concrete seminary main building utilizing special moment resisting space frames. Design specifications
from NBCP and NSCP were utilized in the design process. The parts analysed and designed included:
beams, columns, and slabs. The parts of the building chosen were considered to be the most critical due to
the highest result computed throught STAAD pro considering all load combinations. Design schedule and
member details of the structure were then created for the design proper.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
TITLE PAGE....................................................................................................................................................1
APPROVAL SHEET..........................................................................................................................................2
ABSTRACT.......................................................................................................................................................3
LIST OF TABLES..............................................................................................................................................6
LIST OF FIGURES............................................................................................................................................7
CHAPTER I - PROJECT BACKGROUND........................................................................................................8
1.1 Introduction.............................................................................................................................................8
1.2 The Project..............................................................................................................................................9
1.3 Project Location....................................................................................................................................10
1.4 Project Objectives.................................................................................................................................12
1.5 The Client..............................................................................................................................................12
1.6 Project Scope and Limitation................................................................................................................12
1.7 Project Development.............................................................................................................................13
CHAPTER 2: DESIGN INPUTS......................................................................................................................15
2.1 Description of the Structure..................................................................................................................15
2.2 Classification of the Structure...............................................................................................................18
2.3 Architectural Plans................................................................................................................................18
CHAPTER 3: DESIGN CONSTRAINTS, TRADE-OFFS, AND STANDARDS...............................................21
3.1 Design Constraints................................................................................................................................21
3.2 Tradeoffs...............................................................................................................................................22
3.2.1 One Way Slab................................................................................................................................22
3.2.2 Two Way Slab................................................................................................................................23
3.3 Significance of Chosen Tradeoffs to the Quantitative Design Constraints...........................................23
3.4 Method of Measurements for Quantitative Constraints........................................................................24
3.5 Ranking Scale.......................................................................................................................................24
3.6 Initial Estimate and Ranking Computation............................................................................................25
3.7 Raw Designers Ranking and Assessment...........................................................................................27
3.8 Design Standards.................................................................................................................................29
CHAPTER IV: DESIGN OF STRUCTURE.....................................................................................................30
4.1 Design Methodology.............................................................................................................................30
4.1.1 Structural Plans..............................................................................................................................32
5
4.1.2 Design Specifications....................................................................................................................33

4.1.3 Material Properties.........................................................................................................................33
4.1.4 Structural Models...........................................................................................................................33
4.1.5 Load Models..................................................................................................................................34
4.1.6 Structural Analysis.........................................................................................................................39
4.1.7 Structural Design...........................................................................................................................41
4.2 Raw Ranking Validation, Comparison of Results, and Final Ranking Assessments...........................49
4.2.1 Final Estimates of Tradeoffs..........................................................................................................49
4.2.2 Validation of Raw Designers Ranking...........................................................................................49
4.2.3 Final Designers Ranking...............................................................................................................50
4.2.4 Designers Final Ranking Assessment..........................................................................................51
CHAPTER V: FINAL DESIGN.........................................................................................................................52
5.1 Design Schedules.................................................................................................................................52
5.1.1 Design Schedule of Slabs..............................................................................................................52
5.1.2 Design Schedule of Beams...........................................................................................................53
5.1.3 Design Schedule of Columns........................................................................................................55
5.1.4 Beam Details..................................................................................................................................56
5.1.5 Column Details...............................................................................................................................57
APPENDICES.................................................................................................................................................59
APPENDIX A: CODES AND STANDARDS................................................................................................59
APPENDIX B: RESULTS OF STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS..........................................................................69
APPENDIX C: DESIGN OF BEAMS...........................................................................................................73
APPENDIX D: DESIGN OF ONE-WAY SLAB............................................................................................85
APPENDIX E: DESIGN OF TWO-WAY SLAB............................................................................................91
APPENDIX F: SAMPLE DESIGN OF COLUMNS....................................................................................104
APPENDIX G: COST ESTIMATE.............................................................................................................108
APPENDIX H: ESTIMATE OF MAN HOURS...........................................................................................110
APPENDIX I: PERCENTAGE DEFLECTION FROM ALLOWABLE.........................................................110
APPENDIX H: REFERENCES..................................................................................................................110
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1. Total Floor Areas and Functions per Floor........................................................................................15

Table 2. Summary of Initial Estimate of Values...............................................................................................26
Table 3. Wind Intensity (One-Way).................................................................................................................36
Table 4. Wind Intensity (Two-Way).................................................................................................................38
Table 5. Final Estimate of Tradeofs................................................................................................................49
Table 6. Comparison of Initial and Final Estimate of Tradeoffs......................................................................49
Table 7. Final Designers Ranking..................................................................................................................51
Table 8. Slab Schedule...................................................................................................................................52
Table 9. Beam Schedule.................................................................................................................................53
Table 10. Column Schedule............................................................................................................................55
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1. Perspective of the Proposed Seminary...........................................................................................10
Figure 2. Distance of the Nearest Fault Line to the Structure........................................................................11
Figure 3. Vicinity Map of the Seminary...........................................................................................................11
Figure 4. Project Development Process.........................................................................................................13
Figure 5. Structural Model of the Structure.....................................................................................................15
Figure 6. Floor Plans of the Building...............................................................................................................20
Figure 7. One Way Slab System.....................................................................................................................22
Figure 8. Two Way Slab System.....................................................................................................................23
Figure 9. Ranking Scale for Importance Factor..............................................................................................25
Figure 10. Ranking Scale for Satisfactory Factor...........................................................................................25
Figure 11. Design Methodology......................................................................................................................30
Figure 12. One Way Slab Framing Plan.........................................................................................................32
Figure 13. Two Way Slab Framing Plan.........................................................................................................32
Figure 14. Geometric Modelling of One Way Slab.........................................................................................33
Figure 15. Geometric Modelling of Two-Way Slab.........................................................................................34
Figure 16 Load Diagrams for One-Way Slab.................................................................................................36
Figure 17. Load Diagrams for Two-Way Slab.................................................................................................38
Figure 18. Result of Structural Analysis for One-Way Slab............................................................................39
Figure 19. Result of Structural Analysis for Two-Way Slab............................................................................40
Figure 20. Stress-Strain Diagram for Singly Reinforced Beam......................................................................41
Figure 21. Design of Singly Reinforced Beam................................................................................................42
Figure 22. Design of Doubly Reinforced Beam..............................................................................................43
Figure 23. Design for Spacing of Stirrups for Beams.....................................................................................44
Figure 24.Beindg of Slab................................................................................................................................45
Figure 25. Two Way Slab Strips Considered in EFM......................................................................................45
Figure 26. Two Way Slab Design (EFM).........................................................................................................46
Figure 27. Determining the Steel Area of a Column.......................................................................................47
Figure 28. Column Check for Compression or Tension Controls...................................................................48
Figure 29. Beam Details..................................................................................................................................56
8
Figure 30. Column Details..............................................................................................................................57

Figure 31. Beam-Column Interaction Detail....................................................................................................58
CHAPTER I - PROJECT BACKGROUND

1.1 Introduction
Structural analysis and design is a very old art and is known to human beings since early
civilizations. The Pyramids constructed by Egyptians around 2000 B.C. stands today as the testimony to
the skills of master builders of that civilization. Many early civilizations produced great builders, skilled
craftsmen who constructed magnificent buildings such as the Parthenon at Athens (2500 years old), the
great Stupa at Sanchi (2000 years old), Taj Mahal (350 years old), Eiffel Tower (120 years old) and many
more buildings around the world. These monuments tell us about the great feats accomplished by these
craftsmen in analysis, design and construction of large structures.
Today we see around us countless houses, bridges, fly-overs, high-rise buildings and spacious
shopping malls. Planning, analysis and construction of these buildings is a science by itself. In the early
periods houses were constructed along the riverbanks using the locally available material. They were
designed to withstand rain and moderate wind. Today structures are designed to withstand earthquakes,
tsunamis, cyclones and blast loadings. These have been made possible with the advances in structural
engineering and a revolution in electronic computation in the past 50 years. The construction material
industry has also undergone a revolution in the last four decades resulting in new materials having more
strength and stiffness than the traditional construction material. Combinations of some materials were also
utilized so as to have a better performance in the maintenance of the structure.
One good example are the reinforced concrete structures which are one of the most popular
structural systems today. The combination of concrete and a steel reinforcement gives advantages that
make a structure maintain its form for a long time. Concrete is one of the most popular materials for
buildings because it has high compressive strength and flexibility in its form and it is widely available. The
history of concrete usage dates back for over a thousand years. Contemporary cement concrete has been
used since the early nineteenth century with the development of Portland cement. Despite the high
compressive strength, concrete has limited tensile strength, only about ten percent of its compressive
strength and zero strength after cracks develop. In the late nineteenth century, reinforcing materials, such
as iron or steel rods, began to be used to increase the tensile strength of concrete.
Today steel bars are used as common reinforcing material. Usually steel bars have over 100 times
the tensile strength of concrete; but the cost is higher than concrete. Therefore, it is most economical that
concrete resists compression and steel provides tensile strength. Also it is essential that concrete and steel
10
deform together and deformed reinforcing bars are being used to increase the capacity to resist bond
stresses.
Advantages of reinforced concrete can be summarized as follows (Hassoun, 1998).
1. It has a relatively high compressive strength.
2. It has better resistance to fire than steel or wood
3. It has a long service life with low maintenance cost.
4. In some types of structures, such as dams, piers, and footing, it is the most economical structural
material.
5. It can be cast to take any shape required, making it widely used in precast structural components.
Disadvantages of reinforced concrete can be summarized as follows:
1. It has a low tensile strength (zero strength after cracks develop).
2. It needs mixing, casting, and curing, all of which affect the final strength of concrete.
3. The cost of the forms used to cast concrete is relatively high. The cost of form material and artisanry may
equal the cost of concrete placed in the forms.
4. It has a lower compressive strength than steel (about 1/10, depending on material), which requires large
sections in columns of multi-storey buildings.
5. Cracks develop in concrete due to shrinkage and the application of live loads.
1.2 The Project

The project is a seminary constituted of five-storeys containing all the necessary rooms for the
residents of the building. It is intended to be built in Antipolo, Rizal. As a city with many public and private
schools, constructing a seminary is appropriate. This will be very important for the Antipoleneos since the
city contains the National Shrine of the Philippines and thus needs training areas for students who want to
become priests someday.
11
Figure 1. Perspective of the Proposed Seminary
The building is rectangular shaped and has a total area of 700 m 2 with dimensions of 50 m x 14 m.
The structure to be constructed will be the main building of a seminary. The first floor contains the refectory
(dining), chapel, lobby, infirmary (clinic), recreation area, kitchen and staff room. The second and third
floors contain class rooms, laboratories, library, and offices. The fourth and fifth floor contain the study area
12
and dormitories. It has a main stair, fire exit, ramps, and an elevator. The height of each floor is 3 m having
a total of 15 m. The covering of the building will be a roof deck.
1.3 Project Location

The project area is located in Antipolo, Rizal, which is included in the areas under seismic zone 4.
The figure below shows the distance of the planned structure from the nearest fault line which is the Makati
Valley Fault System.
Figure 2. Distance of the Nearest Fault Line to the Structure
13
Figure 3. Vicinity Map of the Seminary

Address: Lot 6 Blk.1, Sampaguita St. Bermuda Hts. Subd., Brgy. San Luis, Antipolo City
Nearest Fault Line Distance: 16.3 km
1.4 Project Objectives

The main objective of this project is to analyse and design a reinforced concrete structure in
accordance with the principles written in NSCP 2010. Other objectives of the project are as follows:
a. To design a seminary that will have an acceptable probability of performing satisfactorily during
its intended life time.
b. To provide all the necessary architectural plans, structural plans, and the estimate of the
building cost.
c. To plan the structure considering balanced constraints, trade-offs and standards on the design.
1.5 The Client
14
The client of this structure is a set of religious people lead by Mrs. Sharon Umayam. She is a
businesswoman and at the same time the president of the lectors in Our Lady of Peace and Good Voyage
Church (National Shrine of the Philippines).
1.6 Project Scope and Limitation

The following were the scope covered by the design project:
1.) The project was designed in accordance to the National Building Code of The Philippines and the
National Structural Code of the Philippines.
2.) Analysis of the loads and moments was done using STAAD Pro.
3.) All architectural plans such as floor plan and perspective of the apartment were provided.
The following were the limitations of the design project:
1.)
2.)
3.)
4.)
Only beams, slabs, and columns were considered in the design.

The cost estimates for the mechanical, plumbing and architectural plan were not included.
The plumbing and electrical plans are not included in this design.
The interior design of the structure was not considered.
1.7 Project Development

PLANNING/CONCEPTUALIZATION
IDENTIFICATION OF DESIGN STANDARDS

AND PARAMETERS
PRESENTATION OF ARCHITECTURAL AND STRUCTURAL PLANS WITH INITIAL ESTIMATE
IDENTIFICATION OF DESIGN CONSTRAINTS,

TRADE-OFF
15
LOAD IDENTIFICATION, STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS,

AND FINAL DESIGN
Figure 4. Project Development Process

The project development process started with the planning/conceptualization. In this stage, the
identification of client was the most important so as to know the structure to be build. In this case, the
structure requested by the client was a seminary. It also included the identification of the location where the
structure was intended to be built.
The next stage was the identification of design standards. Knowing the structure to be constructed,
the next part was to know the specific design standards that are required before coming up to the design
(i.e., minimum dimension of a classroom, minimum size of an elevator shaft, etc.). These will set the
parameters in the creation of the architectural and floor plans which is the next stage in the process.
In the third stage, the plans will be presented to the client so that alterations could be made. After
all has been settled, constraints can now be identified, which is the next stage. In this, the constraints that
were projected will then be classified as either qualitative or quantitative. Knowing the quantitative tradeoffs will pave the way to the determination of the trade-offs for the structure.
In the last stage, geometric design, computation, and final estimation for each trade-offs will be
made. Then, all of these will be presented to the client. The client will then rate each trade-off. The one
which has the most favorable rating among all will then be chosen for the design of the structure.
16
CHAPTER 2: DESIGN INPUTS
2.1 Description of the Structure

As what was said, the structure will be a seminary. The structure contains five floors with each floor
having different function from the other. The structure has two access stairs, set of ramps, and an elevator.
The structure contains five floors with each floor having different functions. The structure has special
moment reinforced concrete frames both in longitudinal and transverse axes. The figure below shows the
model of the structure.
17
This model
shows
the
structural
members of
the
structure.
The blue
members
beams
are
the
and columns while the violet members
the
total floor
are
slabs that form the building. The table below shows the
area and the different areas of the rooms contained in each floor.
Figure 5. Structural Model of the Structure
Table 1.
Total Floor
Areas and Functions per Floor
AREA (m2)
FUNCTION
1ST Floor
Ramps and Elevator
49
Stairs
25
C.R.
22.5
Chapel
168
Refectory
168
Staff Room
63
Clinic
49
Lobby
70
Kitchen
63
Hallway
22.5
TOTAL
700
2nd Floor
Ramps and Elevator
49
Stairs
25
18
C.R.
22.5
Offices
3(45)
Class Rooms & Laboratories
4(63)
Other Rooms
32.5
Lounge
35
Hallway
79
TOTAL
700
3rd Floor
Ramps and Elevator
49
Stairs
25
C.R.
22.5
Offices
45
Class Room
2(63)
Other Rooms
133
Faculty Room
65
Library
94.5
Hallway
73.5
Sisters Room
66.5
TOTAL
700
4th Floor
Ramps and Elevator
49
Stairs
12.5
C.R.
22.5
Study Area
178.5
Dormitory
255.5
Vice Rectors and Prefects Room
66.5
Toilet & Bath
59.5
Laundry
28
Hallway
28
19
TOTAL
700
5th Floor
Ramps and Elevator
49
Stairs
25
Hallway
28
Dormitory (1)
201
Dormitory (2)
196
Toilet & Bath
2(59.5)
Laundry
28
Rectors Room
66.5
TOTAL
700
TOTAL FLOOR AREA
3500
2.2 Classification of the Structure
Using the National Structural Code of the Philippines (NSCP) 2010, the designer was able to
classify the structure. With respect to the occupancy category, the building is classified as an Essential
Facility. With respect to the structural members, the building will have special moment resisting frames.
These data will help in designing the structure especially in the determination of the seismic forces acting
on the structure.
2.3 Architectural Plans

Height is 3 m per floor, for a total of 15 m.
20
21
22
Figure 6. Floor Plans of the Building
23
CHAPTER 3: DESIGN CONSTRAINTS, TRADE-OFFS, AND STANDARDS

3.1 Design Constraints
Constraint based design takes the parameters associated with a design problem and links them to
the attributes of the formal components and relationships of a solution. The forms that compose a building
are defined by a set of attributes. Constraints have to be managed effectively throughout the decision
making process, and also could be reduced or eliminated.
In this project, the design constraints were divided into two types, namely, quantitative and
qualitative. Quantitative constraints are those constraints that can be measured using engineering
methods (estimation). The qualitative constraints are those which cannot be measured but are ranked
through the designers perception and experience. The following are the constraints that are considered in
the design of the structure.
3.1.1 Quantitative Constraints
1. Economic. Cost is always an integral part of marketing and livelihood even in ancient times.
Thus, this constraint is considered in this design. The cost of the structure is highly significant
both to the designer and the client.
2. Constructability. This constraint refers to the ratio of the number of workers that will be hired
for the construction, to period of time for the structure to be built. One of these two will be
considered as a constant so as to measure an accurate difference between them.
3. Safety/Serviceability. Structures always meet some limitations but sometimes some part of it
could be accidentally damaged. The safety of a structure is the one which must have the most
outstanding consideration among all. Safety makes a structure function effectively overtime.
3.1.2 Qualitative Constraints
1. Aesthetics. The beauty of the structure lies upon its final output. This constraint depends on
the taste of a person therefore it is considered as a qualitative constraint. It depends on a
persons perception which design is more presentable.
24
2. Sustainability. In civil engineering, sustainability refers to the conditions under which a

building is still considered useful. Should these limit states be exceeded, a structure that may
still be structurally sound would nevertheless be considered unfit.
In the process, only the quantitative constraints was focused by the designer. Tradeoffs were
enumerated next in this section which will then be ranked and assessed.
3.2 Tradeoffs
Design trade-off strategies are always present in the design process. Considering design
constraints, trade-offs that have a significant effect on the structural design of the structure were provided
by the designer. As a trade-off, the designer will have to evaluate which of the two is more effective
considering each constraint. The following are the tradeoffs that were chosen by the designer because they
are the most fitted to the said constraints.
3.2.1 One Way Slab
Figure 7. One Way Slab System

One-way slabs are those slabs with an aspect ratio in plan of 2:1 or greater, in which bending is
primarily about the long axis. In heavily loaded slabs, the thickness is often governed by shear or flexure,
while in lightly-loaded slabs, the thickness is generally chosen based on deflection limitations. Both lightly
and heavily loaded slabs are typically dimensioned so that no shear reinforcement is required, as placing
25
stirrups in slabs is perceived to be difficult and costly. One-way slabs are designed for flexure and shear on
a per meter width basis, assuming that they act as a series of independent strips. Thus one-way shear in
slabs is often referred to as beam shear, and design for flexure and shear is carried out using a beam
analogy
3.2.2 Two Way Slab
Figure 8. Two Way Slab System

When a rectangular slab is supported on all the sides and the length-to-breadth ratio is less than
two, it is considered to be a two-way slab. The slab spans in both the orthogonal directions. In general, a
slab which is not falling in the category of one-way slab is considered to be a two-way slab.
3.3 Significance of Chosen Tradeoffs to the Quantitative Design Constraints

In this section, the constraints enlisted in the beginning of the chapter will be related to the
tradeoffs chosen by the designer. The final decision of choosing the tradeoff that will be used for the
structure lies on the client. Thus, the significance of the tradeoffs to the constraints is needed.
Economic. For the cost effectiveness of the structure, the tradeoffs chosen will be designed to be
compared whether of the two will be more economical. Clients do not have the same state of living and
26
thus might give priority to this constraint. Some might choose the tradeoff that have lower price but might
not give way to the positivity of other tradeoffs.
Constructability. Time measures is significant in the construction of the structure. Knowing which
of the difference in the period of construction two tradeoffs might be significant for a client. Some clients
need shorter period of time and thus give priority to this constraint.
Safety/Serviceability. The magnitudes of deflection for concrete members are also important. Any
structure used by the people should be quite rigid and relatively-vibration free so as to provide security.
Designing these two tradeoffs will give different results. Thus, one tradeoff might be safer than the other. A
safer structure known to a client might be given priority.
Through the consideration of multiple constraints, the designer will have to choose what particular
design among the tradeoffs will be used. The tradeoff is very significant in the design for it will solve the
problem regarding the concern of client considering the constraints.
3.4 Method of Measurements for Quantitative Constraints

The main method of measurement that will be used in this design is estimation. For the economic
constraint, the cost of the whole building. This includes the materials that will be used for the construction of
the beams, slabs, and columns. It also includes the cost of the reinforcements that will be used for the
structure. For the constructability of the structure, the period of time that will be utilized to construct the
building will be estimated, together with the number of workers that will work on that period of time. The
number of workers will be constant for both tradeoffs. The difference between the days will give the result
for each tradeoff. For the last constraint, the deflection of the most critical beam will be computed for each
tradeoff and will then be compared.
27
3.5 Ranking Scale

The ranking scale that will be used in this design is based on the model on tradeoff strategies
formulated by Otto and Antonsson (1991). The importance factors in each constraint is scaled from 0 to 5,
while the ability to satisfy the constraint is scaled from -5 to 5, 5 being the highest for both. After obtaining
the results, the product of the importance and ability to satisfy the criteria will be summed of from each
constraint. The result will then be the overall ranking of the tradeoff.
Figure 9. Ranking Scale for Importance Factor
Figure 10. Ranking Scale for Satisfactory Factor
Computation of ranking for ability to satisfy criterion of materials:
Difference( )=
Higher valueLower value

100( )
Lower value
Subordinate rank =Governing rank (
difference
)
10
Equation 1
Equation 2
The above equations will be used for the manipulation of the rankings of each constraint given to
the tradeoffs. The governing rank is the highest possible value set by the designer. The subordinate rank in
second equation is a variable that corresponds to its percentage difference from the governing rank along
the ranking scale.
28
3.6 Initial Estimate and Ranking Computation

To determine the difference between the two tradeoffs, certain methods were used by the designer.
For the economic constraint, a cost estimate was provided. For the constructability constraint, an estimate
of the number of working days was provided, given that there will be 50 workers. For the
safety/serviceability constraint, the deflection of the most critical beam was considered.
In this part, a rough computation of the estimates was utilized. The values written in the table below
were just assumed by the designer whose basis came from experience.
Table 2. Summary of Initial Estimate of Values
Estimated Value
One-Way Slab
Two-Way Slab
Php 9,000,000
Php 8,000,000
500 days
450 days
4 % of allowable
5 % of allowable
Constraint
Economic
Constructability
Safety/Serviceability
Computation of ranking for Economic Constraint

%difference=
higher valuelower value

100
higher value
%difference=
90000008000000
100
9000000
%difference=11.11
Subordinate rank =Governing rank (
difference
)
10
Subordinate rank =51.11
29
Computation of ranking for Constructability Constraint
%difference=

10
higher value
%difference=
500400
100
500
%difference=20
Subordinate rank =Governing rank
difference
10
Subordinate rank =52

Subordinate rank =3
Computation of ranking for Safety/Serviceability Constraint
%difference=

10
higher value
%difference=
30
54
10
5
%difference=20
Subordinate rank =Governing rank
difference
10
Subordinate rank =52
Subordinate rank =3
3.7 Raw Designers Ranking and Assessment

After making an initial estimate of the structure considering the constraints, the design came up
with the raw rankings on the one-way slab and two-way slab. The values computed in the latter section is
tabulated.
Table 1. Raw Designers Ranking
CONSTRAINT
(CRITERIA)
ABILITY TO SATISFY THE CRITERION

IMPORTANCE
One-Way Slab
Two-Way Slab
1. Economic
2. Constructability
3. Maintenance
42
51
Over All Ranking
These tabulated values are just subjective, especially the importance factors. This values will still
go on with the validation after making a final estimate and final ranking. Knowing the significance of the
constraints to the tradeoffs, the ranks in its importance are given as 5, for economic, 4, for constructability,
and 2, for maintenance.
31
As for economic constraint, it turned out that the initial cost for the two-way slab is cheaper than the
one-way slab, considering only the volume of concrete that will be used. As for the constructability
constraint, it turned out that the labor constituting of 50 workers will have to work for longer time for the
construction of the one way slab. As for the safety/serviceability constraint, the deflection of the critical
member in the two-way slab is quite greater than that of the one-way slab.
Overall, it turned out that the two-way slab tradeoff outranked the one-way slab tradeoff for the raw
designers ranking.
3.8 Design Standards

To come up with the final design of the structure, the designer utilized the codes and standards
written in the following:
1
2
National Building Code of the Philippines

National Structural Code of the Philippines (NSCP) 2010
The National Building Code of the Philippines (PD 1096). The National Building Code of the
Philippines, also known as Presidential Decree No. 1096 was formulated and adopted as a uniform building
code to embody up-to-date and modern technical knowledge on building design, construction, use,
occupancy and maintenance. The Code provides for all buildings and structures, a framework of minimum
standards and requirements to regulate and control
location, site, design, and quality of materials,
construction, use, occupancy, and maintenance.

The National Structural Code of the Philippines 2010. This code provides minimum standards
to safeguard life or limb, property and public welfare by regulating and controlling the design, construction,
quality of materials pertaining to the structural aspects of all buildings and structures within its jurisdiction.
The provision of this code shall apply to the construction, alteration, moving, demolition, repair,
maintenance and use of any building or structure within its jurisdiction, except work located primarily in a
32
public way, public utility towers and poles, hydraulic flood control structures, and indigenous family
dwellings.
33
CHAPTER IV: STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS AND DESIGN
4.1 Design Methodology

The design was done in accordance with the codes and standards appropriate for a reinforced
concrete structure. The figure below shows the step by step process of the design of the building.
FRAMING PLANS
STRUCTURAL PLANS
DESIGN SPECIFICATIONS
NSCP
NBCP
MATERIAL PROPERTIES
COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH
MODULUS OF ELASTICITY
STRUTURAL MEMBER
DIMENSIONS
GEOMETRIC MODELLING
STRUCTURAL MODEL
LOAD MODELS
DEAD AND LIVE LOAD

SEISMIC AND WIND LOAD
LOAD COMBINATIONS
STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS
SHEAR DIAGRAMS
MOMENT DIAGRAMS
REACTIONS AND DEFLECTIONS
STRUCTURAL DESIGN
DESIGN SCHEDULES
DETAILING
Figure 11. Design Methodology

34
The first process in design methodology was the creation of structural plans. The structural plans
included the framing plans of the two trade-offs. The next step was to know the design specifications.
These specifications are the codes and standards needed for the structures classification and description.
The National Building Code and National Structural Code of the Philippines are the main books used for
design specifications.
The third step in the process was the identification of the material properties. The compressive
stresses and modulus of elasticity of the concrete and steel to be used were determined. Also, the
structural member dimensions (b, d, etc.) were assumed. The fourth step was the creation of the structural
model. These models included geometric modelling, which showed the positioning of the structural
members (beams, columns, slabs) in 3D form.
The fifth step was the presentation of load models. In this part, the loads acting on the structure
were computed. These loads were the dead load, live load, wind load, and seismic (earthquake) load,
applying also the load combinations. After computing for these loads, load models was presented also in
3D form. The sixth step was the structural analysis. In structural analysis, member (beams and columns)
forces and reactions were determined. The member forces included were the axial force, shear force, and
moment acting on the member.
The last part was the structural design. The structural design did not include the design of footings.
The values from the structural analysis was utilized to design the structural members of the structures,
mainly the beams and columns. The maximum moment acting on a beam was used to design the beam,
and the maximum value of the axial force acting on a column was used to design the column. To design the
slab, the total load on the floors was utilized.
35
4.1.1 Structural Plans
Figure 12. One Way Slab Framing Plan
Figure 13. Two Way Slab Framing Plan
36
4.1.2 Design Specifications

The all the design specifications coming from NBCP and NSCP for the structure is stated Appendix
A of the project.
4.1.3 Material Properties

The material properties that were utilized are 20.7 MPa for the compressive strength of the
concrete (fc) and 415 MPa for the compressive strength of steel (fy). The modulus of elasticity of steel (Es)
is 200000 MPa, while the modulus of elasticity of concrete (Ec) was solved through the following formula,
Ec =4700 f ' c
4.1.4 Structural Models
Figure 14. Geometric Modelling of One Way Slab
37
Figure 15. Geometric Modelling of Two-Way Slab
4.1.5 Load Models
The loads considered in this project are the dead load, live load, wind load and seismic loads. Load
combinations were also applied to these loads. The load combinations that were utilized were those that
are written in Section 203 of NSCP 2010.
38
The figure below show the preliminary loads acting on the structure.
Dead Load
Self
Weight = 2.8272 kPa
Floor Loads
= 3.49 kPa
39
Figure 16a. Dead Load
Live Load
Floor Loads = 1.9 kPa
Figure 16b. Live Load

Wind Load
Table 3. Wind Intensity (One-Way)

Height (m)
Intensity (kPa)
1.34496
1.40150
1.4884
12
1.55674
15
1.5999
Figure 16c. Wind Load (+X)
40
Figure 16
Figure 16d. Earthquake Load (-Z)

Figure 16. Load Diagrams for One-Way Slab
Dead Load
Self
Weight = 2.8272 kPa
Floor Loads =
3.49 kPa
41
Figure 17a. Dead Load
Live Load
Floor
Loads = 1.9 kPa
Figure 17b. Live Load

Wind Load
Table 4. Wind Intensity (Two-Way)
Figure 17c. Wind Load (+Z)

42
Height (m)
Intensity (kN)
1.34496
1.40150
1.4884
12
1.55674
15
1.5999
Figure 17d. Earthquake Load (+X)

Figure 17. Load Diagrams for Two-Way Slab
4.1.6 Structural Analysis

For the structural analysis of the members, the results considered are those that came from the
load combination which gave the maximum values of member forces and reactions.
A summary of values of the member forces is presented in the appendices. The following figures
show the results of the structural analysis done through the software STAAD.
Maximum Value of Axial Forces in Columns

F = 1337.143 kN
43
Figure 18a. Axial Forces and Shear Forces
Maximum Value of Bending Moments

(Z) in Beams
+M = 198.802 kN-m
-M = 103.972 kN-m
Figure 18b. Moment along Z and Y

axes.
Figure 18. Result of Structural Analysis for One-Way Slab
44
Maximum Value of Axial Force in Columns

F = 2424.714 kN
Figure 19a. Axial and Shear Forces
Maximum Value of Bending Moments (Z) in

Beams
+M = 310.203 kN-m
-M = 164.303 kN-m
Figure 19b. Moments along Z and Y axes
Figure 19. Result of Structural Analysis for Two-Way Slab

4.1.7 Structural Design
In this section, the beams, columns, and slabs were designed. The main goal of the structural
design of the members is to know the number of bars and their spacing, and check if the assumed
dimensions are adequate for the structure
45
. For beams and columns, only the most critical parts were designed. For one-way slab, only one
slab was considered both in longitudinal and transverse directions was designed. For two-way slab, only
one strip was designed also considering both longitudinal and transverse directions. For convenience, a
sample procedure of computation for a structural member will be shown. The manual computations of the
members is shown in the appendices.
4.1.7.1 Design of Beams

Due to forces acting on the beam, the whole structure experiences flexure, and thus the whole
length of the beam have moments within them. Also due to these forces, the beam experiences a shearing
stress, which makes a part of the beam to be compressed (top), and another part to be tensed (bottom)
.
To design the beams
of the entire structure, the beam which had

the highest moment was picked and
the resulting design for that beam will
be applied to all other beams in the
structure. The dimensions of the
beam (b,t) and the stresses (fc,fy)
were provided by the designer.
Figure 20. Stress-Strain Diagram for Singly Reinforced Beam
The parts of the beam to be

designer are the supports, which
experience negative moment, and the midspan, which experience positive moment. Moreover, the stressstrain diagram of the cross-sectional of the beam was used for the design. The following flow charts
present the step by step process of designing a beam.
46
Given b, d, fc, fy, and Mu
min =
Ru =
b =
max = 0.75b
<
max
NO
YES
As = minbd
N=
YES
>
min
NO
As = bd
N=
eams Figure 21. Design of Singly Reinforced Beam

47
DOUBLY
REINFORCED
As = As1 + As2
=
Y
=
N
N
=
48
Figure 22. Design of Doubly Reinforced Beam
49
Given Vu and other properties
Vc =
4.1.7.2 Design of Slabs

To design a slab, we always consider the longer and shorter span of the slab
since
bending is experience by the whole. For One-way slabs, the process is quite
N
same in designing a singly reinforced
concrete beam. The only
the
the
N
Vu > Vc
Vu < 0.5Vc
NO NEED
STIRRUPS
difference
is FOR
that we
assume that we get a strip from the whole
length of the slab. The width of that strip is 1 meter with thickness
provided by the designer.
Following the procedure of solving for the reinforcement of singly reinforced

beams, the desired number of bars for one-way slab was computed. For the
Vs = Vn - Vc
Vn = Vu/
spacing of bars, the width, b (1 m) was divided by the diameter of the

bar times the quantity of bars.
Since the two-way slab transmits the load to the supports in
trapezoidal form, the method used for one-way slab is not
Figure 24.Beindg of Slab

applicable. For the two-way slab, the equivalent frame method was used. The two-way slab was designed
N
S =The flow
considering REDESIGN
the positive and negative moments passedVs
through
< the column strip and middle strip.
chart below shows the procedure of equivalent frame method.
N
Smax = d/4 or 300
(get smaller)
Vs <
Use the smaller value

between S and Smax
Smax = d/2 or 600

(get smaller)
Figure
for Spacing
of Stirrups in
forEFM
Beams
Figure
25.23.
TwoDesign
Way Slab
Strips Considered
50
Given E and L1, L2, t as

dimensions of slab
Given E and a, b, lcolumn as

dimensions of column
PROCEED WITH THE MDM TO OBTAIN THE MOMENTS
Figure 26. Two Way Slab Design (EFM)
SLAB AS SINGLY REINFORCED BEAM USING THE MOMENTS OBTAINED

51
4.1.7.3 Design of Columns

From the structural analysis, the column that experienced the greatest axial forces was designed.
The designer started the design of the column in determining the number of bars and its positioning within
the gross area of the column. Knowing the position of bars in the column, the designer then computed for
the axial force capacity column due to the eccentric load. The flow chart below shows the step by step
process done by the designer. The second flow chart is applicable only in this design (eccentricity on one
side only).
Given P, My, fc, fy, b, and t
Assume a value of g between 0.02 0.04
As = gAg
N = As/Abar
Redesign
Determine actual As and g
P < Pcap
Pcap = (0.8)Ag(0.85fc(1-g)+gfy)
Check If Compression or Tension Controls
Figure 27. Determining the Steel Area of a Column
52
Given e, As and other properties
fy = 600(d-c)/c , solve for c
Pb = 0.85fcab
Pb(eb+x) = C1(d-.5a) + C2(d-d), solve for eb
e > eb
Compression Controls
fs = 600(d-c)/c, in terms of c
Tension Controls
fs = 600(c-d)/c, in terms of c
Pcap + T = C1 + C2
Pcap(e+x) = C1(d-.5c) + C2(d-d)
Solve for c and Pcap, then check.
Figure 28. Column Check for Compression or Tension Controls
53
4.2 Raw Ranking Validation, Comparison of Results, and Final Ranking Assessments
In this section, the raw designers ranking was validated through the gathered results of the design.
The initial and final estimated values was then be compared. With the help of the final designers ranking,
the final ranking assessments was concluded.
4.2.1 Final Estimates of Tradeoffs

The table below shows the result of the estimation of construction cost, man days, and cost of
maintenance for each tradeoff.
Table 5. Final Estimate of Tradeoffs
TRADEOFFS
CONSTRAINT
One-Way Slab
Two-Way Slab
Economic (Construction Cost)
Php 10,778,163.00
Php 8,735,033.00
Constructability
435 days
375 days
1.6 %
5.7 %
4.2.2 Validation of Raw Designers Ranking
Table 6. Comparison of Initial and Final Estimate of Tradeoffs

CONSTRAINT
Economic
Constructability
Safety/Serviceabilit
y
Initial Estimate
One Way Slab
Two Way Slab
Php 9,000,000
Php 8,000,000
500 days
450 days
4 % of allowable
5 % of allowable
Final Estimate
One Way Slab
Two Way Slab
Php 10,778,163
Php 8,735,033
435 days
375 days
1.6 % of allowable
5.7 % of allowable
Looking at the table, there are large discrepancies between the assumed values and the computed
values. However, the results of the final estimate of values has almost the same outcome with the initial
estimate. It turned out that the two way slab is better than the one way slab in terms of both economic and
constructability constraint, while one way slab is better than two way slab in terms of safety/serviceability
54
constraint. These results are the same as what was said in the raw ranking, which makes raw design to be
quite certain in this project.
4.2.3 Final Designers Ranking

Computation of ranking for Economic Constraint
%difference=
107781638735033
100
10778163
%difference=18.9562
Computation of ranking for Constructability Constraint
%difference=
435375
100
435
%difference=13.79

Computation of ranking for Safety/Serviceability Constraint
55
%difference=
5.71.6
10
5.7
%difference=71.93
Table 7. Final Designers Ranking

CONSTRAINT
(Criteria)
Ability to Satisfy the Criterion
Importance
One-Way Slab
Two-Way Slab
Economic
3.10438
Constructability
3.621
-2.193
40.0059
40.614
Overall Rank
4.2.4 Designers Final Ranking Assessment

In terms of economic constraints, the two-way slab got the rank of 5 considering both the concrete
works and rebar works. As for the constructability constraints, the number of man hours needed to
construct the structure in one-way slab is larger rather than the two-way slab, thus making the two-way slab
gets the rank of 5. For safety/serviceability constraint, the percentage of deflection from allowable in the
one way slab is smaller than the two way slab making this trade get a rank of 5 in this constraint.
After gathering all data and making the designers overall final ranking assessment. Overall, the
two tradeoffs almost had the same rank, but then the two-way slab outranked the one way slab tradeoff
with a nail biting difference. With these information, the designer concluded that the governing tradeoff is
still two-way slab in contrast with the raw designers ranking.
56
57
CHAPTER V: FINAL DESIGN

As what was proven from the previous chapters, the governing tradeoff was the two-way slab. After
going through all the design processes, the designer can now conclude the final design of the structure
which includes the design schedule of the structural members.
5.1 Design Schedules

The design schedule of the structural members included the investigated dimensions and designed
number of bars with spacing. The following tables below show the design schedule of the project.
5.1.1 Design Schedule of Slabs

Table 8. Slab Schedule
SLAB
(2F-Roof)
t (mm)
S-1
S-2
150
150
S-1
S-2
150
150
Spacing (mm)
bar
Column Strip Middle Strip

LONGITUDINAL DIRECTION
12
300
300
12
300
300
TRANSVERSE DIRECTION
12
300
300
12
300
300
58
tie
10
10
10
10
5.1.2 Design Schedule of Beams

Table 9. Beam Schedule
2F-Roof
Beam
B1
B2
B3
B4
B5
B6
B7
B8
B9
B10
B11
B12
B13
B14
B15
B16
B17
B18
B19
B20
B21
B22
B23
B24
B25
B26
B27
B28
B29
B30
B31
B32
B33
B34
B35
B36
Dimensions
b (mm)
t (mm)
350
500
350
500
350
500
350
500
350
500
350
500
350
500
350
500
350
500
350
500
350
500
350
500
350
500
350
500
350
500
350
500
350
500
350
500
350
500
350
500
350
500
350
500
350
500
350
500
350
500
350
500
350
500
350
500
350
500
350
500
350
500
350
500
350
500
350
500
350
500
350
500
Top (Left)
5 - 25
5 - 25
5 - 25
5 - 25
5 - 25
5 - 25
5 - 25
5 - 25
5 - 25
5 - 25
5 - 25
5 - 25
5 - 25
5 - 25
5 - 25
5 - 25
5 - 25
5 - 25
5 - 25
5 - 25
5 - 25
5 - 25
5 - 25
5 - 25
5 - 25
5 - 25
5 - 25
5 - 25
5 - 25
5 - 25
5 - 25
5 - 25
5 - 25
5 - 25
5 - 25
5 - 25
59
Number of Bars
Bottom (Mid) Top (Right)
4 - 25
5 - 25
4 - 25
5 - 25
4 - 25
5 - 25
4 - 25
5 - 25
4 - 25
5 - 25
4 - 25
5 - 25
4 - 25
5 - 25
4 - 25
5 - 25
4 - 25
5 - 25
4 - 25
5 - 25
4 - 25
5 - 25
4 - 25
5 - 25
4 - 25
5 - 25
4 - 25
5 - 25
4 - 25
5 - 25
4 - 25
5 - 25
4 - 25
5 - 25
4 - 25
5 - 25
4 - 25
5 - 25
4 - 25
5 - 25
4 - 25
5 - 25
4 - 25
5 - 25
4 - 25
5 - 25
4 - 25
5 - 25
4 - 25
5 - 25
4 - 25
5 - 25
4 - 25
5 - 25
4 - 25
5 - 25
4 - 25
5 - 25
4 - 25
5 - 25
4 - 25
5 - 25
4 - 25
5 - 25
4 - 25
5 - 25
4 - 25
5 - 25
4 - 25
5 - 25
4 - 25
5 - 25
B37
B38
B39
B40
B41
B42
B43
B44
B45
B46
B47
B48
B49
B50
B51
B52
B53
B54
B55
B56
350
350
350
350
350
350
350
350
350
350
350
350
350
350
350
350
350
350
350
350
500
500
500
500
500
500
500
500
500
500
500
500
500
500
500
500
500
500
500
500
5 - 25
5 - 25
5 - 25
5 - 25
5 - 25
5 - 25
5 - 25
5 - 25
5 - 25
5 - 25
5 - 25
5 - 25
5 - 25
5 - 25
5 - 25
5 - 25
5 - 25
5 - 25
5 - 25
5 - 25
60
4 - 25
4 - 25
4 - 25
4 - 25
4 - 25
4 - 25
4 - 25
4 - 25
4 - 25
4 - 25
4 - 25
4 - 25
4 - 25
4 - 25
4 - 25
4 - 25
4 - 25
4 - 25
4 - 25
4 - 25
5 - 25
5 - 25
5 - 25
5 - 25
5 - 25
5 - 25
5 - 25
5 - 25
5 - 25
5 - 25
5 - 25
5 - 25
5 - 25
5 - 25
5 - 25
5 - 25
5 - 25
5 - 25
5 - 25
5 - 25
5.1.3 Design Schedule of Columns

Table 10. Column Schedule
2F-Roof
Column
C1
C2
C3
C4
C5
C6
C7
C8
C9
C10
C11
C12
C13
C14
C15
C16
C17
C18
C19
C20
C21
C22
C23
C24
C25
C26
C27
C28
C29
C30
C31
C32
C33
Dimensions
b (mm)
t (mm)
550
550
550
550
550
550
550
550
550
550
550
550
550
550
550
550
550
550
550
550
550
550
550
550
550
550
550
550
550
550
550
550
550
550
550
550
550
550
550
550
550
550
550
550
550
550
550
550
550
550
550
550
550
550
550
550
550
550
550
550
550
550
550
550
550
550
# of Bars
8-32mm
8-32mm
8-32mm
8-32mm
8-32mm
8-32mm
8-32mm
8-32mm
8-32mm
8-32mm
8-32mm
8-32mm
8-32mm
8-32mm
8-32mm
8-32mm
8-32mm
8-32mm
8-32mm
8-32mm
8-32mm
8-32mm
8-32mm
8-32mm
8-32mm
8-32mm
8-32mm
8-32mm
8-32mm
8-32mm
8-32mm
8-32mm
8-32mm
61
Tie Wires
tie
Spacing
10 mm
480 mm
10 mm
480 mm
10 mm
480 mm
10 mm
480 mm
10 mm
480 mm
10 mm
480 mm
10 mm
480 mm
10 mm
480 mm
10 mm
480 mm
10 mm
480 mm
10 mm
480 mm
10 mm
480 mm
10 mm
480 mm
10 mm
480 mm
10 mm
480 mm
10 mm
480 mm
10 mm
480 mm
10 mm
480 mm
10 mm
480 mm
10 mm
480 mm
10 mm
480 mm
10 mm
480 mm
10 mm
480 mm
10 mm
480 mm
10 mm
480 mm
10 mm
480 mm
10 mm
480 mm
10 mm
480 mm
10 mm
480 mm
10 mm
480 mm
10 mm
480 mm
10 mm
480 mm
10 mm
480 mm
5.1.4 Beam Details
Figure 29. Beam Details
5.1.5
Column
Details
62
Figure 30. Column Details
Figure 31. Beam-Column Interaction Detail
63
APPENDICES
APPENDIX A: CODES AND STANDARDS
National Building Code of the Philippines (NBC)

The following are the sections and codes that are followed in conceptualizing and designing the structural
plan of the apartment building:
Section 401. Types of Construction

Type I. The structural elements may be any of the materials permitted by this Code.
Section 701. Occupancy Classified.

Group B. Residentials, Hotels and Apartments
Section 805. Ceiling Heights.

Habitable rooms provided with artificial ventilation have\ ceiling heights not less than 2.40 meters
measured from the floor to the ceiling; Provided that for buildings of more than one-storey, the
minimum ceiling height of the first storey shall be 2.70 meters and that for the second storey 2.40
meters and succeeding storeys shall have an unobstructed typical head-room clearance of not less
than 2.10 meters above the finished floor. Above stated rooms with a natural ventilation shall have
ceiling height not less than 2.70 meters.
Section 806. Size and Dimensions of Rooms.

Minimum sizes of rooms and their least horizontal dimensions shall be as follows:
1. Rooms for Human Habitations. 6.00 square meters with at least dimensions of 2.00
2. Kitchens. 3.00 square meters with at least dimension of 1.50 meters;
3. Bath and toilet. 1.20 square meters with at least dimension of 0.90 meters.
Section 808. Window Openings.

Every room intended for any use, not provided with artificial ventilation system as herein specified
in this Code, shall be provided with a window or windows with a total free area of openings equal to
at least ten percent of the floor area of room, and such window shall open directly to a court, yard,
public street or alley, or open water courses.
Section 1207. Stairs, Exits and Occupant Loads.

General. The construction of stairs and exits shall conform to the occupant load requirements of
buildings, reviewing stands, bleachers and grandstands:
a. Determinations of Occupant Loads. The Occupant load permitted in any building or portion thereof
shall be determined by dividing the floor area assigned to that use by the unit area allowed per
occupant as determined by the Secretary.
64
b. Exit Requirements. Exit requirements of a building or portion thereof used for different purposes
shall be determined by the occupant load which gives the largest number of persons. No
obstruction shall be placed in the required width of an exit except projections permitted by this
Code.
National Structural Code of the Philippines (NSCP) 2010

Notation
Ag
= gross area of section, mm2.
As
= area of nonprestressed tension reinforcement, mm 2.
A s , min = minimum amount of flexural reinforcement, mm 2.

A st
= total area of nonprestressed longitudinal reinforcement (bars and steel shapes), mm 2.
Av
= area of shear reinforcement within a distance s, mm2.
A vf
= area of shear-friction reinforcement, mm 2.
A ' s = area of compression reinforcement, mm 2.

b
= width of compression face of member, mm.
bw
= web width, mm.
= distance from extreme compression fiber to neutral axis, mm.
cc
= clear cover from the nearest surface in tension to the surface of the flexural tension
reinforcement, mm.
Cm = a factor relating actual moment diagram to an equivalent uniform moment diagram.

D
= dead loads, or related internal moments and forces.
= distance from extreme compression fiber to centroid of tension reinforcement, mm.
d'
= distance from extreme compression fiber to centroid of compression reinforcement, mm.

65
db
= nominal diameter of bar, wire, or prestressing strand, mm.
dc
= thickness of concrete cover measure from extreme tension fiber to center of bar or wire located
closest thereto, mm.
ds
= distance from extreme tension fiber to centroid of tension reinforcement, mm.
dt
= distance from extreme compression fiber to extreme tension steel, mm.
= load effects of earthquake, or related internal moments and forces.
Ec
= modulus of elasticity of concrete, MPa.
Es
= modulus of elasticity of reinforcement, MPa.
EI
= flexural stiffness of compression member, N-mm 2.
= loads due to weight and pressures of fluids with well defined densities and controllable maximum
heights, or related internal moments and forces.
f 'c
= specified compressive strength of concrete, MPa.
fy
= specified yield strength of nonprestressed reinforcement, MPa.
f yt = specified yield strength fy

H
= loads due to weight and pressure of soil, water in soil, or other materials, or related internal
moments and forces.
= overall thickness of member, mm.
= moment of inertia of section beam about the centroidal axis, mm 4.
I cr
= moment of inertia of cracked section transformed to concrete, mm 4.
Ie
= effective moment of inertia for computation of deflection, mm 4.
Ig
= moment of inertia of gross concrete section about centroidal axis, neglecting reinforcement, mm 4.
= live loads, or related internal moments and forces.

66
Ld
= development length, mm.
ln
= length of clear span measured face-to-face of supports, mm.
M a = maximum moment in member at stage deflection is computed.

M cr = cracking moment.
Pb
= nominal axial load strength at balanced strain conditions
Pn
= nominal axial load strength at given eccentricity.
Vc
= nominal shear strength provided by concrete
= wind load, or related integral moments and forces.
wc
= unit weight of concrete, kN/m 3.
wu
= factored load per unit length of beam or per unit area of slab.
= ratio of flexural stiffness of beam section to flexural stiffness of a width of slab bounded laterally
by center line of adjacent panle, if any on each side of beam.
fm = average value of f
for all beams on edges of a panel.
= factor
= net tensile strain in extreme tension steel at nominal strength.
= modification factor reflection the reduced mechanical properties of lightweight concrete.
= multiplier for additional long-time deflection
reinforcement =
= ration of nonprestressed tension
A s /bd
'
= ratio of nonprestressed compression reinforcement =
= reinforcement ratio producing balanced strain conditions
= strength-reduction factor.
67
A ' s /bd
The following are the sections and codes that are followed in conceptualizing and designing the structural
plan of the apartment building:
Section 203 - Combination of Load

a.Minimum densities for design loads from materials
b.Minimum design loads
c. Minimum uniform and concentrated live loads
Section 206 - Other Minimum Loads
a.206.3 Impact loads
b.206.3.1 Elevators
c. 206.3.2 Machinery
Section 207 - Wind Load

a. 207.5.10 Velocity Pressure
b. 207.5.6.6 Velocity Pressure Exposure Coefficient
c. 207.5.7.2 Topographic Factor
d. 207.5.4.4 Wind Directionality Factor
e. 207.5.6 Exposure
Section 208 - Earthquake Loads

a. 208.5.1.1 Earthquake Loads
b. 208.5.2.1 Design Base Shear
c. 208.5.2.2 Structure Period
Wind Load
Section 207.5.4 Wind Directionality Factor
The wind directionality factor, Kd, shall be determined form Table 207-2. This factor Shall only be applied
when used in conjunction with load combinations specified in Section 203.3 and 203.4.
Section 207.5.5 Importance factor

An importance factor Iw, for the building or other structure shall be determined from Table 207-3
based on building and structure categories listed in Table 103-1.
Section 207.5.6 Exposure

For each wind direction considered, the upwind exposure category shall be based on ground
surface roughness that is determined from natural topography, vegetation, and constructed
facilities.
Section 207.5.7 Topographic factor

The wind speed up effect shall be included in the calculation of design wind loads by using the
factor kzt. If site conditions and locations of structures do not meet all the conditions specified in
Section 207.5.7.1 the kzt= 1.0
68
Section 207.5.8 Gust Effect factor

The gust effect factor shall be calculated as permitted in Sections 207.5.8.1 to 207.5.8.5, using
appropriate values for natural frequency and damping ratio as permitted in Section 207.5.8.6.
Section 207.5.9 Enclosure Classifications

For the purpose of determining internal pressure coefficients, all buildings shall be classified as
enclosed, partially enclosed, or open as defined in Section 207.2.
Section 207.5.10 Velocity Pressure
Velocity pressure, qz, evaluated at height z shall be calculated by the following equation qz=
47.3x10-6 kz kzt kd V2 Iw.
Section 207.5.11 Pressure and Force Coefficients

Internal Pressure Coefficients, GCpi, shall be determined from fig. 207-5 based on building
enclosure classifications determined from Section 207.5.9
Section 207.5.12 Rigid Building for all heights

Design wind pressures for the MWFRS of a buildings of all heights shall be determined by the
following equation;
P= qGCP qi(GCPi)
Section 207.5.13 Design Wind Loads on Open Buildings with Monoslope, Pitched, or Troughed
Roofs
Plus and minus signs signify pressure acting toward and away from the top surface of the roof,
respectively.
Section 207.5.14 Design Wind Loads on Solid Freestanding Walls and Solid Signs
The design wind force for solid freestanding walls and solid signs shall be determined by the
following formula:
F= qhGCfAs
Section 207.5.15 Design Wind Loads on other Structures
The design wind force for other structures shall be determined by the following equation:
F=qzGfCfAf
Earthquake Load
Section 208.5.1 Earthquake Loads and Modeling Requirements

Structures shall be designed for ground motion producing structural response and seismic forces in
any horizontal direction. The following earthquake loads shall be used in the load combinations set
forth in Section 203:
E= Eh + Eb
Section 208.5.2 Static Force Procedure
Section 208.5.2.1
The total design base shear in a given direction shall be determined form the following equation:
V= CvI (W)
69
RT
The total design base shear need not exceed the following:
V= 2.5CaI (W)
R
The Base Shear shall not be less than the following:
V= .11CaIW
Section 208.5.2.2
The value of T shall be determined using the following method:
Determine the structure period T using Method A
T = Ct (hn)3/4
The following are the tables used in each design computations:
Stone Concrete Fill

1.53 Kpa
Gypsum Board
0.2 Kpa
Suspended Steel Channel
0.1 Kpa
Mechanical Duct Allowance
0.2 Kpa
Terrazo
1.53 Kpa
Grout
0.11 Kpa
CHB
1.65 Kpa
Clay Dry
0.6435 Kpa
Water Proofing
0.05 Kpa
Cement Finish
1.53 pa
Table 204-1 Minimum Densities for Design Loads from Materials
Material
Density (KN/m3)
Masonry, Concrete
16.5
Table 204-2 Minimum Design Dead Loads
Basic Floor Area

Roof Live Load
1.9 Kpa
1.9 Kpa
70
Table 205-1 Minimum Uniform Concentrated Live Loads
Occupancy Category
Seismic Importance Factor I Seismic Importance Factor Ip
I. Essential facilities
1.5
1.5
II. Hazardous facilities
1.25
1.5
III. Special Occupancy Structures 1
1
IV. Standard Occupancy Strutures 1
1
V. Miscellaneous Structures
1
1
Table 208-1 Seismic Importance Factors
Soil Profile
Soil Profile Name
Ave. Properties for Top 30 m Soil Profile

Shear Wave Velocity
SPT
Undrained Shear Strenght
SA
SB
Sc
SD
SE
SF
Hard Rock
>1500
Rock
760 to 1500
Very Dense Soil
360 to 760
>50
>100
Stiff Soil Profile
180 to 360
15 to 50 50 to 100
Soft Soil Profile
<180
<15
<50
Soil Requiring Site-Specific Evaluation See Section 208.4.3.1
Table 208-2 Soil Profile Types
Zone
Z
2
4
0.2
0.4
Table 208-3 Seismic Zone Factor Z
Seismic
Type
Source Closest Distance to Known

Seismic Source
5 Km
10 Km
1.2
1
1
1
A
B
71
Seismic
Type
A
B
C
1
1
Table 208-4 Near-Source factor Na
Source Closest Distance to Known

Seismic Source
5 Km
10 Km
1.6
1.2
1.2
1
1
1
Table 208-5 Near-Source factor Nv
Seismic Zone
Soil Profile Type
2
4
Z=0.2
Z=0.4
SA
0.16
.32Na
SB
0.2
.40Na
Sc
0.24
.40Na
SD
0.28
.44Na
SE
0.34
.44Na
SF
See Footnote 1 of Table 208-8
Table 208-7 Seismic Coefficient, Ca
Seismic Zone
Soil Profile Type
2
4
Z=0.2
Z=0.4
SA
0.16
.32Na
SB
0.20
.40Na
Sc
0.32
.56Na
SD
0.40
.64Na
SE
0.64
.96Na
SF
See Footnote 1 of Table 208-8
Table 208-8 Seismic Coefficient, Cv
72
15 Km
1
1
1
Basic Seismic Force Resisting System
System Limitation and

Building Limitation
Zone 2
Zone 4
C. Moment Resisting Frame

Special reinforced concrete moment frames
8.5
2.8
NL
NL
Table 208-11A Earthquake Force Resisting Structural Systems of Concrete
Zone Classification Province

(Basic Wind Speed)
Zone 2
National
Capital
Region
V=200 kph
Table 207-1 Wind Zone for the Different Provinces of the Philippines
Directionality
factor Kd
Structural Type
Buildings
Main Wind Force Resisting
0.85
System
Components and Cladding
0.85
Arched Roof
Chimneys, Tanks, and Similar Structures
Square
0.9
Hexagonal
0.95
Round
0.95
Soild Signs
0.85
Open Signs and Lattice Framework
0.85
Trussed Towers
Triangular. Square, rectangular
0.85
All other cross sections
0.95
Table 207-2 Wind Directionality factor
Occupancy
Category
I
II
III
IV
V
Description
Iw
Essential
1.15
Hazardous
1.15
Special Occupancy
1.15
Standard Occupancy
1
Miscellaneous
0.87
Table 207-3 Importance factor Iw
73
Exposure (Note 1)
B
C
Height above Ground Level (m)
Case 1 Case 2 Cases 1& 2
0-4.5
0.7
0.57
0.85
6
0.7
0.62
0.9
7.5
0.7
0.66
0.94
9
0.7
0.7
0.98
12
0.76
0.76
1.04
15
0.81
0.81
1.09
18
0.85
0.85
1.13
Table 207-4 Velocity Pressure Exposure Coefficients
D
Cases 1&2
1.03
1.08
1.12
1.16
1.22
1.27
1.31
APPENDIX B: RESULTS OF STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS
ONE-WAY SLAB - 2ND FLOOR ONLY

LOAD COMBINATION 25
B1
B2
B3
B4
B5
B6
B7
B8
B9
B10
B11
B12
B13
B14
B15
B16
B17
B18
B19
B20
B21
B22
M (+) kN-m
126.053
106.538
103.758
102.465
102.459
102.417
102.384
102.354
102.328
102.305
102.283
102.291
102.501
104.659
121.689
119.788
109.518
115.358
113.523
113.553
113.511
113.477
M (-) kN-m
54.173
88.807
96.137
94.783
94.787
94.743
94.708
94.677
94.652
94.632
94.615
94.627
94.828
97.701
102.066
91.591
90.706
102.728
101.024
101.068
101.037
101.011
74
C1
C2
C3
C4
C5
C6
C7
C8
C9
C10
C11
C12
C13
C14
C15
C16
C17
C18
C19
C20
C21
C22
P (axial) kN
716.25
1167.911
901.271
659.296
648.353
650.131
650.673
650.261
648.889
646.456
642.771
637.496
640.321
782.079
655.887
909.786
1032.503
1337.143
1223.228
1093.274
1088.322
1088.522
B23
B24
B25
B26
B27
B28
B29
B30
B31
B32
B33
B34
B35
B36
B37
B38
B39
B40
B41
B42
B43
B44
B45
B46
B47
B48
B49
B50
B51
B52
B53
B54
B55
B56
B57
B58
B59
B60
B61
B62
B63
B64
B65
113.753
113.442
113.407
113.371
113.333
113.327
113.753
114.447
104.034
94.009
94.342
100.653
99.343
99.48
99.385
99.385
99.12
99.467
99.457
99.444
99.427
99.408
99.385
99.385
99.12
101.778
165.696
117.879
116.265
181.239
181.084
181.455
181.239
181.641
181.258
180.169
178.283
175.536
172.066
168.38
96.67
91.01
152.202
101.206
100.986
100.963
100.941
100.918
100.924
101.206
103.972
92.472
82.678
82.949
92.696
91.73
91.775
91.727
91.73
91.504
91.77
91.768
91.762
91.753
91.742
91.727
91.73
91.504
95.317
94.837
95.317
94.837
95.714
95.649
96.15
95.714
96.44
96.118
95.048
93.138
90.324
86.754
82.962
86.754
82.962
91.624
75
C23
C24
C25
C26
C27
C28
C29
C30
C31
C32
C33
C34
C35
C36
C37
C38
C39
C40
C41
C42
C43
C44
C45
C46
C47
C48
1088.536
1088.541
1088.546
1088.552
1088.557
1088.597
1090.155
1088.052
961.669
554.61
667.379
667.365
628.637
591.907
591.279
591.598
591.766
591.862
591.893
591.861
591.804
591.766
591.635
591.793
580.226
571.052
B66
B67
B68
B69
B70
B71
B72
B73
B74
B75
B76
B77
B78
B79
B80
MAX
195.951
198.802
192.389
186.273
185.902
186.265
186.447
186.078
185.027
183.207
180.553
177.195
173.766
169.821
129.274
198.802
98.32
92.438
91.563
92.486
92.302
92.796
93.079
92.769
91.736
89.892
87.173
83.718
80.155
75.276
72.978
103.972
1337.143
TWO-WAY SLAB 2ND FLOOR ONLY

LOAD COMBINATION 28
B1
B2
B3
B4
B5
B6
B7
B8
B9
B10
B11
B12
B13
B14
B15
B16
B17
B18
B19
B20
M (+) kN-m
172.977
171.697
161.936
153.256
153.58
153.537
153.506
154.481
153.211
158.193
241.324
244.246
192.946
180.034
180.476
180.391
180.326
180.272
179.951
184.834
M (-) kN-m
99.608
92.002
134.495
130.775
130.907
130.88
130.854
130.834
130.584
135.814
107.117
98.952
144.63
140.603
140.712
140.653
140.599
140.552
140.263
145.842
76
C1
C2
C3
C4
C5
C6
C7
C8
C9
C10
C11
C12
C13
C14
C15
C16
C17
C18
C19
C20
P (axial) kN
815.541
1327.418
1132.805
944.5
943.541
938.319
933.722
928.783
922.857
911.476
676.922
1316.598
2424.714
2024.74
1617.599
1628.637
1628.645
1628.478
1628.477
1628.981
B21
B22
B23
B24
B25
B26
B27
B28
B29
B30
B31
B32
B33
B34
B35
B36
B37
B38
B39
B40
B41
B42
B43
B44
B45
B46
B47
B48
B49
B50
B51
B52
B53
B54
B55
B56
MAX
172.977
171.697
161.936
153.256
153.58
153.537
153.624
153.481
153.211
153.723
153.506
153.481
153.211
158.193
214.464
273.728
261.998
248.799
243.8
239.874
236.372
232.611
227.863
221.372
171.673
234.499
310.203
296.045
280.414
275.41
271.484
267.982
264.221
259.473
252.971
189.269
310.203
99.608
92.002
134.495
130.775
130.907
130.88
130.873
130.834
130.584
130.862
130.854
130.834
130.584
135.814
154.359
164.303
159.855
153.956
148.97
145.044
141.541
137.78
133.034
126.575
118.885
154.359
164.303
159.855
153.956
148.97
145.044
141.514
137.78
133.034
126.575
118.885
164.303
77
C21
C22
C23
C24
C25
C26
C27
C28
C29
C30
C31
C32
C33
1621.501
1051.221
730.998
1301.163
1087.248
869.727
876.181
876.068
876.076
876.076
876.353
873.233
676.922
2424.714
APPENDIX C: DESIGN OF BEAMS

Beam with Maximum Moment was Designed (One-Way Tradeoff)
For Support
The following are the given data

Mu
164.303
Vu
f'c
fy
b
t
d'
d
bar
tie
143.83
20.7
415
350
500
62.5
437.5
25
10
kN-m
Es
kN
MPa
MPa
mm
mm
mm
mm
mm
mm
Ec
n
L
Part 1. Computation of Steel Area and Number of

Bars
Step 1. Solve for max and Mu(max)
b = (0.75*0.85*f'c*1*600)/(fy*(600+fy)
= 0.85, for f'c < 28 MPa
max = = 0.75b
= *fy/f'c
Mu(max) = *f'c**b*(d^2)*(1-.59)
= 0.9
* If Mu < Mu(max), design is Singly Reinforced
* If Mu > Mu(max), design is Doubly Reinforced
200000
21383.7
1
10
7
MPa
MPa
m
RESULTS
0.85
0.01597
b
7
0.01198
max
3
0.24024
0.9
Mu(max) 257.336
SINGLY
kN-m
Step 2. Using Singly Reinforcement. Solving As and N bars

As1 = max*b*d
N = As/Abar, Abar = pi*(bar^2)/4
As
N'
78
1834.90
6
4
mm2
pcs
Part 2. Designing the Vertical Stirrup

Step 1. Calculate the Shear Strength by Concrete (Vc)
Vc = sqrt(f'c)*b*d/6
RESULTS
* If Vu > Vc, stirrups needed, go to Step II

* If Vu < Vc, but Vu > .5*Vc Stirrups needed
* If Vu < .5**Vc, stirrups are not needed
Vc
Vc
.5Vc
Step 2. Calculate the Shear Strength by Stirrup (Vs)

Vn = Vu/
Vn
189.3352
kN
Vs
parameter
73.22246
466.7734
kN
Si = Av*fy*d/Vs, Av = pi*(tie^2)/4
220
Av
For Smax,
110
Si
* If Vs < 0.33*sqrt(f'c)*b*d, Smax = d/2 or 600mm (get smaller) parameter
* If Vs > 0.33*sqrt(f'c)*b*d, Smax = d/4 or 400mm (get smaller)
Smax1
Smax2
Epoxy
Light
Sf
Zinc
Normal
78.53982
200
229.9033
220
600
200
mm2
mm
mm
mm
mm
mm
Vs = Vn - Vc
* If Vs < 0.67*sqrt(f'c)*b*d, go to Step 3.
* If Vs > 0.67*sqrt(f'c)*b*d, redesign.
116.1128
104.5015
52.25075
Stirrups Needed
kN
kN
kN
Step 3. Spacing of Stirrups
Uncoated
Part 3. Development Length
The following are the supplementary data.
Cc
40
Mm
Bar Coat
Epoxy
Step 1. Determine the Value of the Coefficients (t,e,s,)

t = 1.0 for all other situations
e = 1.5 for epoxy-coated bars with cover less than 3d or 6d
= 1.2 for all other epoxy-coated bars
= 1 for uncoated or zinc coated bars
t = .8 for 20 mm bars and smaller
= 1 for 25 mm bars and larger
= 1 for normal weight concrete
79
RESULTS
t
e
1
1.2
1
1
Step 2. Compute for the development

length
ld = (fy*t*e*s*d)/(1.1**sqrt(f'c)*((cc+Ktr)/d))
Ktr = 40*Atr/(S*N), Atr = 2*pi*(tie^2)/4
Atr
157.079
6
Ktr
7.853982
ld
80
1299.611
mm2
mm
For Midspan
Mu
103.972
Vu
f'c
fy
b
t
d'
d
bar
tie
89.11886
20.7
415
350
500
62.5
437.5
25
10
kN-m
Es
kN
MPa
MPa
mm
mm
mm
mm
mm
mm
Ec
n
L

Bars
b = (0.75*0.85*f'c*1*600)/(fy*(600+fy)
= 0.85, for f'c < 28 MPa
max = = 0.75b
= *fy/f'c
Mu(max) = *f'c**b*(d^2)*(1-.59)
= 0.9
200000
21383.7
1
10
7
MPa
MPa
m
RESULTS
0.85
0.01597
b
7
0.01198
max
3
0.24024
0.9
Mu(max) 257.336
SINGLY
kN-m

As1 = max*b*d
As
N'
1834.90
6
4
mm2
pcs

Step 1. Calculate the Shear Strength by Concrete
(Vc)
RESULTS

Vc
Vc
81
116.112
8
104.501
kN
kN
5
52.2507
.5Vc
5
kN
Stirrups Needed

Vn = Vu/
Vs = Vn - Vc
Vn
99.0209
5
Vs
paramete
r
17.0918
466.773
4
Av
Si
paramete
r
78.5398
2
230
229.903
3
Smax1
Smax2
Sf
220
600
220
kN
kN

For Smax,
If Vs < 0.33*sqrt(f'c)*b*d, Smax = d/2 or 600mm (get
* smaller)
If Vs > 0.33*sqrt(f'c)*b*d, Smax = d/4 or 400mm (get
* smaller)
Epoxy
Zinc
Uncoated
220
110
Light
Normal

cc
40
mm
Bar Coat
Epoxy

e = 1.5 for epoxy-coated bars with cover less than 3d or
6d
82
RESULTS
t
e
1
1.2
1
1
mm2
mm
mm
mm
mm
mm
Atr
length
Ktr
ld
157.079
6
7.13998
3
1319.29
5
mm2
mm
Part 4. Checking the Beam in Deflection

Step 1. Calculate the Gross Moment of Inertia and the Cracking Moment of the Beam
RESULTS
Ig = b(t^3)/12
Mcr = Ig*fr/t, fr = 0.62**sqrt(f'c), yt = t/2
Ig
mm4
Mcr
3645833333
2.82082966
5
250
41.1370992
8
kN-m
Icr
91438412.2
9
mm4
Ie
311587799
mm4
fr
yt
MPa
mm
Step 2. Calcualte the Moment of Inertia of

the
Cracked Section
Icr = b*(c^3)/12 + nAs(d-c)+nAs'(c-d')
Step 3. Calculate the Effective Moment of Inertia
Ie = ((Mcr/Mu)^3)*Ig + ((1-(Mcr/Mu)^3)*Icr)
Step 4. Determine and Check the
Deflection
Mu = W(L^2)/8, W=____
= 5*W*(L^4)/(384*Ec*Ie)
max = L/360
max
83
16.9750204
1
0.30585036
19.4444444
4
OK
kN/m
mm
mm
Beam with Maximum Moment was Designed (Two-Way Tradeoff)

For Support

Mu
310.203
kN-m
Es
Vu
265.89
kN
Ec
200000
21383.7
1
f'c
fy
b
t
d'
d
20.7
415
350
500
62.5
437.5
MPa
MPa
mm
mm
mm
mm
N
L
10
7
bar
tie
25
10
mm
mm

Bars
b = (0.75*0.85*f'c*1*600)/(fy*(600+fy)
= 0.85, for f'c < 28 MPa
MPa
MPa
M
RESULTS
0.85
0.01597
b
7
0.01198
max
3
0.24024
0.9
Mu(max) 257.336
DOUBLY
max = = 0.75b
= *fy/f'c
Mu(max) = *f'c**b*(d^2)*(1-.59)
= 0.9
kN-m
Step 2. Using Doubly Reinforcement. Solving As1, Mu1, Mu2, and

As2
As1 = max*b*d
Mu1 = Mu(max)
As1
Mu1
Mu2 = Mu - Mu1
Mu2
Mu2 = *As2*fy*(d-d'), Solve for As2

Step 3. Solve for the Stress of the Compression Steel
84
As2
1834.90
6
257.336
52.8669
6
377.452
6
mm2
kN-m
kN-m
mm2
C=T
0.85*f'c*a*b = As1*fy, Solve for a
a = c, Solve for c
c
377.452
6
457.722
6
f's = 600*(c-d')/c
* If f's > fy, A's = As2
* If f's < fy, A's = As2*fy/f's
A's
123.653
145.474
1
342.222
2
457.722
6
N
N'
5
1
f's
mm
mm
MPa
mm2
Step 4. Determine the Number of Bars

As = As1 + As2
For Tension
For Compression
N' = A's/Abar, Abar = pi*(bar^2)/4
pcs
pcs

(Vc)
RESULTS
116.112
Vc
8
kN
104.501
Vc
5
kN
52.2507
.5Vc
5
kN
Stirrups Needed

Vn = Vu/
Vs
paramete
r
295.433
3
179.320
6
466.773
4
Av
78.5398
2
Vn
Vs = Vn - Vc
kN
kN

220
85
mm2
For Smax,
If Vs < 0.33*sqrt(f'c)*b*d, Smax = d/2 or 600mm (get
* smaller)
If Vs > 0.33*sqrt(f'c)*b*d, Smax = d/4 or 400mm (get
* smaller)
Epoxy
Zinc
Uncoated
110
Light
Normal
Si
paramete
r
80
229.903
3
mm
Smax1
Smax2
Sf
220
600
80
mm
mm
mm
mm

Cc
40
mm
Bar Coat
Epoxy

e = 1.5 for epoxy-coated bars with cover less than 3d or
6d
RESULTS
t
e
1
1.2
1
1
Atr
length
Ktr
ld
86
157.079
6
78.5398
2
524.647
1
mm2
mm
For Midspan

Mu
164.303
Vu
f'c
Fy
B
T
d'
D
bar
tie
kN-m
Es
kN
MPa
MPa
mm
mm
mm
mm
mm
mm
Ec
n
L
143.83
20.7
415
350
500
62.5
437.5
25
10

Bars
b = (0.75*0.85*f'c*1*600)/(fy*(600+fy)
= 0.85, for f'c < 28 MPa
max = = 0.75b
= *fy/f'c
Mu(max) = *f'c**b*(d^2)*(1-.59)
= 0.9
200000
21383.7
1
10
7
MPa
MPa
M
RESULTS
b
max
Mu(max)
0.85
0.01597
7
0.011983
0.24024
0.9
257.336
SINGLY
kN-m

As1 = max*b*d
As
N
1834.90
6
4
mm2
pcs

(Vc)
RESULTS

Vc
Vc
87
116.1128
104.5015
kN
kN
.5Vc
52.25075
Stirrups Needed

Vn = Vu/
Vs = Vn - Vc
kN
Vn
159.8111
kN
Vs
parameter
43.69833
466.7734
kN
Av
Si
parameter
Smax1
Smax2
Sf
78.53982
330
229.9033
220
600
220

220
For Smax,
110
* If Vs < 0.33*sqrt(f'c)*b*d, Smax = d/2 or 600mm (get smaller)
* If Vs > 0.33*sqrt(f'c)*b*d, Smax = d/4 or 400mm (get smaller)
Epoxy
Zinc
Light
Normal
mm
2
mm
mm
mm
mm
mm

Cc
40
mm
Bar Coat
Epoxy

e = 1.5 for epoxy-coated bars with cover less than 3d or 6d
length
88
RESULTS
t
e
1
1.2
1
1
Atr
157.079
6
mm2
Ktr
Ld
7.13998
1319.3
mm
Part 4. Checking the Beam in

Deflection
Step 1. Calculate the Gross Moment of Inertia and the Cracking Moment of the Beam
RESULTS
Ig = b(t^3)/12
Mcr = Ig*fr/t, fr = 0.62**sqrt(f'c), yt = t/2
Ig
mm4
Mcr
3645833333
2.82082966
5
250
41.1370992
8
kN-m
Icr
93279189.2
4
mm4
Ie
149036936.
7
mm4
fr
yt
MPa
mm
Step 2. Calcualte the Moment of Inertia of

the
Cracked Section
Icr = b*(c^3)/12 + nAs(d-c)+nAs'(c-d')
Step 3. Calculate the Effective Moment of Inertia
Ie = ((Mcr/Mu)^3)*Ig + ((1-(Mcr/Mu)^3)*Icr)
Step 4. Determine and Check the
Deflection
Mu = W(L^2)/8, W=____
= 5*W*(L^4)/(384*Ec*Ie)
max = L/360
max
89
26.8249795
9
1.01047278
19.4444444
4
OK
kN/m
mm
mm
APPENDIX D: DESIGN OF ONE-WAY SLAB

Considering Longer Side
Design of S-1
The following are the given data.
Dead Loads (kPa)
Weight of Slab
3.537
Stone Concrete
1.53
Fill
Gypsum Board
0.2
Total
5.267
Live Load (kPa)
Basic Floor
1.9
Area
f'c
fy
20.7
415
MPa
MPa
t
b
bar
150
1000
12
mm
mm
mm
tie
10
mm
134
mm
Step 1. Calculate the Factored Loads and the Moment in the Slab
W = 1.2DL + 1.6LL
For Midspan,
M = W*(L^2)/14
For Continuous Edge,
M = W*(L^2)/10
RESULTS
W
9.36040
kN/m
Mmid
32.76140
kN/m
Mc.e.
45.86596
kN/m
1.82454
0.00465
max
0.01598
min
0.00337
0.00465
Step 2. Calculate the and check for the Midspan

R = Mu/(b*(d^2))
= (0.85*f'c/fy)*(1-(sqrt(1-((2*R)/
(0.85*f'c))))
max = 0.75*0.85*f'c**600/
(fy*(600+fy))
min = 1.4/fy
If > max,
*
redesign
* If min < < max, ok
If min > , use
*
min
90
Step 3. Calculate the Steel Area and Spacing of Bars

As
697.74823
mm2
S = b*Abar/As, Abar = pi*(bar^2)/4
Abar
S
113.09734
162.08903
mm2
mm
Step 4. Calculate the and check for the Continuous Edge
R
i
max
min
f
2.55435
0.00668
0.01598
0.00337
0.00668
As
1002.23229
mm2
Abar
S
113.09734
112.84543
mm2
mm
As = *b*d
Considering Shorter Side

Dead Loads (kPa)
Weight of Slab
Stone Concrete Fill
Gypsum Board
Total
Live Load (kPa)
Basic Floor Area
3.537
1.53
0.2
5.267
1.9
f'c
fy
L
t
b
bar
tie
d
20.7
415
3.5
150
1000
12
10
134
Step 1. Calculate the Factored Loads and the Moment in the

Slab
W = 1.2DL + 1.6LL
For Midspan,
M = W*(L^2)/14
For Continuous Edge,
M = W*(L^2)/10
91
MPa
MPa
m
mm
mm
mm
mm
mm
RESULTS
9.36040
kN/m
Mmid
8.19035
kN/m
Mc.e.
11.46649
kN/m

R = Mu/(b*(d^2))
= (0.85*f'c/fy)*(1-(sqrt(1-((2*R)/
(0.85*f'c))))
max =
0.75*0.85*f'c**600/(fy*(600+fy))
min = 1.4/fy
* If > max, redesign
* If min > , use min
As = *b*d
S = b*Abar/As, Abar =
pi*(bar^2)/4
92
0.45613
0.00111
max
min
f
0.01598
0.00337
0.00337
As
506.02410
mm2
Abar
113.09734
mm2
223.50188
mm
R
i
max
min
f
0.63859
0.00157
0.01598
0.00337
0.00337
As
506.02410
mm2
Abar
113.09734
mm2
223.50188
mm
Design of S-2
Dead Loads (kPa)
Weight of Slab
3.537
Stone
Concrete Fill
1.53
Gypsum Board
0.2
Total
5.267
Live Load (kPa)
Basic Floor
Area
1.9
f'c
Fy
20.7
415
MPa
MPa
L
T
B
bar
7
150
1000
12
M
mm
mm
mm
tie
D
10
134
mm
mm

Slab
W = 1.2DL + 1.6LL
For Midspan, M =
W*(L^2)/14
For Continuous Edge, M =
W*(L^2)/10
R = Mu/
(b*(d^2))
= (0.85*f'c/fy)*(1-(sqrt(1-((2*R)/(0.85*f'c))))
max = 0.75*0.85*f'c**600/
(fy*(600+fy))
min = 1.4/fy
RESULTS
9.36040
kN/m
Mmid
Mc.e.
32.76140
45.86596
kN/m
kN/m
1.82454
i
max
min
f
0.00465
0.01598
0.00337
0.00465
As
697.74823
mm2
Abar
S
113.09734
162.08903
mm2
mm
2.55435

As = *b*d

93
i
max
min
f
0.00668
0.01598
0.00337
0.00668
As
1002.23229
mm2
Abar
S
113.09734
112.84543
mm2
mm
Considering Shorter Side

Dead Loads (kPa)
Weight of Slab
Stone Concrete Fill
Gypsum Board
Total
Live Load (kPa)
Basic Floor Area
3.537
1.53
0.2
5.267
1.9
f'c
fy
L
t
b
bar
tie
d
20.7
415
3
150
1000
12
10
134

Slab
W = 1.2DL + 1.6LL
For Midspan, M =
W*(L^2)/14
For Continuous Edge, M =
W*(L^2)/10
R = Mu/(b*(d^2))
= (0.85*f'c/fy)*(1-(sqrt(1-((2*R)/
(0.85*f'c))))
max = 0.75*0.85*f'c**600/
(fy*(600+fy))
min = 1.4/fy
94
MPa
MPa
m
mm
mm
mm
mm
mm
RESULTS
9.36040
kN/m
Mmid
Mc.e.
6.01740
8.42436
kN/m
kN/m
0.33512
i
max
min
f
0.00082
0.01598
0.00337
0.00337

As = *b*d
S = b*Abar/As, Abar =
pi*(bar^2)/4
95
As
506.02410
mm2
Abar
113.09734
mm2
223.50188
mm
R
i
max
min
f
0.46917
0.00115
0.01598
0.00337
0.00337
As
506.02410
mm2
Abar
113.09734
mm2
S
N
223.50188
5
mm
pcs
APPENDIX E: DESIGN OF TWO-WAY SLAB

EQUIVALENT FRAME METHOD
Figure.
Design
Strips
for
Equivalent Frame Method
Considering Longitudinal Frame
ts
B
l1
l2
DL
LL
W
f'c
fy
E
Slab
150
1000
4.5
7
General
5.267
1.9
9.3604
20.7
415
21383.7
mm
mm
m
m
c1
c2
lc
Column
550
550
3
mm
mm
m
kPa
kPa
MPa
MPa
MPa
96
Summary of Values for Slabs SAMPLE RESULTS (AB)

Slab1. Determine
l1
l2the MOIc1/l1
c2/l2
FEM
COF
K
Step
and Stiffness
of Columnk
1
7 a*(b^3)/12
7
0.078571
0.078571
4.11
269.6918
0.5086
Ic
7.6E+09 2.47E+10
mm4
Ic =
2
7
7
0.078571
0.078571
4.11
269.6918
0.5086
2.47E+10
Determine lu/lc
lc
3
mm
3
4.5
7
0.122222
0.122222
4.4
111.4543
0.526
4.12E+10
Determine a/b
lu
2.85
mm
4
4.5
7
0.122222
0.122222
4.4
111.4543
0.526
4.12E+10
Find kab in the tables.
lu/lc
0.95
5
4.5
7
0.122222
0.122222
4.4
111.4543
0.526
4.12E+10
a/b
1
K4.5
c = kab*E*Ic/h
6
7
0.122222
0.122222
4.4
111.4543
0.526
4.12E+10
C = (1-0.63(t/a))*((t^3)(a)/3)
kab
4.55
7
4.5
7
0.122222
0.122222
4.4
111.4543
0.526
4.12E+10
K
t = 9*E*C/(l2*(1-b/l2)^2)
K
c
2.5E+11
8
4.5
7
0.122222
0.122222
4.4
111.4543
0.526
4.12E+10
K
ec = 4Kt*Kc/(2*Kt+2*Kc)
C
5.1E+08
9
4.5
7
0.122222
0.122222
4.4
111.4543
0.526
4.12E+10
Kt
1.7E+10
10
4.5
7
0.122222
0.122222
4.4
111.4543
0.526
4.12E+10
Step 2. Determine the MOI and Stiffness of
Slab
Is = b*(t^3)/12
Compute a/l1 & b/l1
Find ks in the tables.
Find FEM and COF in the tables.
Ks = ks*E*Is/l1
Kec
3.1E+10
Is
a/l1
b/l2
ks
FEM
COF
Ks
2E+09
0.12222
0.12222
4.4
111.454
0.526
4.1E+10
Figure. Design Strip for Longitudinal Frame
Table. Summary of Coefficients and Stiffness for Slabs in Longitudinal Frame
97
mm4
kN-m
Step 3. Determine the Distribution Factors

DFxy = Kxy/K
Table. Summary of Distribution Factors and FEM
Member
AB
BA
BC
CB
CD
DC
DE
ED
EF
FE
FG
K
2.5E+10
2.5E+10
2.5E+10
2.5E+10
4.12E+1
0
4.12E+1
0
4.12E+1
0
4.12E+1
0
4.12E+1
0
4.12E+1
0
4.12E+1
0
SUMMARY OF VALUES FOR DF AND FEM

DF
FEM
Member
K
0.28438 -269.69
GF
4.1E+10
0.22141 269.6918
GH
4.1E+10
0.22141 -269.69
HG
4.1E+10
0.19299 269.6918
HI
4.1E+10
DF
0.28481
0.28481
0.28481
0.28481
FEM
111.454
-111.45
111.454
-111.45
0.32138
-111.454
IH
4.1E+10
0.28481
111.454
0.28481
111.4543
IJ
4.1E+10
0.28481
-111.45
0.28481
-111.454
JI
4.1E+10
0.28481
111.454
0.28481
111.4543
JK
4.1E+10
0.28481
-111.45
0.28481
-111.454
KJ
4.1E+10
0.39824
111.454
0.28481
111.4543
0.28481
-111.454
98
Step 4. Continue with the Moment Distribution Method (MDM)

Table. MDM for Longitudinal Frame
Member
DF
FEM
COF
Balance
CO1
Balance
CO2
Balance
CO3
Balance
CO4
Balance
TOTAL
A
B
AB
BA BC
0.284 0.22 0.22
-270 270 270
0.509 0.51 0.51
-76.7
0
0
0
-39 15.5
0
-5.2 6.88
-2.64
0
0
-0.75
0
0
0
0.38 0.74
0
0.08 0.08
0.04
0
0
0.011
0
0
-350 225 246
C
CB CD
0.19 0.32
270
0.51
30.5
0
0
3.5
1.45
-111
0.53
50.9
0
0
4.01
2.41
MDM FOR LONGITUDINAL FRAME

D
E
F
G
H
DC
DE
ED
EF
FE
FG
GF
GH
HG
HI
IH
0.285 0.285 0.28 0.285 0.285 0.285 0.28 0.285 0.285 0.285 0.285
111.5 -111 111 -111 111.5 -111 111 111.5 111.5 -111 111.5
0.526 0.526 0.53 0.526 0.526 0.526 0.53 0.526 0.526 0.526 0.526
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
26.75
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
7.619
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.996
0
0 1.269
0
0
0
0
0
0 0.361 0.361
0
0
0
0.04 0.19
0
0
0.19
0
0
0.04 0.07
0
0
0.05 0.054
0
305 53.9 147.5 -111 112 -111 111.5
0
0
0
0
-111
J
IJ
JI
JK
0.285 0.28 0.285
KJ
KJ
0.4
-111 111 -111 111

0.526 0.53 0.526 0.53
0
0
0
44.4
0
0
23.35
0
0
6.65 13.3
0
3.498
0
0
7
0.996
0
0
2.79
0
0
0
0.524
0
0
0.52 1.465
0
0
0
0.149 0.149
0
0
0.57 0.567
0
0
0.078
0
0
0.078 0.298
0
0
0.3
0.02 0.022
0
0
0.107 0.107
0
0
0.12
111 111.4 111.6 -111 112.6 -107 119 -72.8 166
Figure. Result of Moment Distribution Method (Moment Diagram)
99
Table. Summary of Moments for Longitudinal Frame

Sla
b
401.3272
401.3272
165.8546
165.8546
165.8546
+
+
+
+
+
-
Summary of Moments
Sla
M
b
W
349.73093
113.87016
6
165.8546
225.18306
246.46759
125.4633
7
165.8546
305.26012
53.916191
65.170221
8
165.8546
147.45254
111.09292
54.458879
9
165.8546
111.69849
111.40015
54.427373
10
165.8546
111.45428
Step 5. Get the Design Moments

For Exterior Slabs
S-1
M(+)
113.8702
M(-)
349.7309
Moments (%)
0.85M(+)
96.78963
0.70M(-)
244.8117
Moment (%) Passed
Column Strip
(+)
(-)
(+)
(-)
Beam
(85%)
82.27119
208.0899
Middle
Strip
Slab(15%)
14.5184
36.7217
17.0805
104.919
Design Moments
CS
MS
7.259222
8.54026
18.36087
52.4596
100
+
+
+
+
+
-
M
111.45428
54.389126
111.47664
111.35343
54.376115
111.60352
110.78107
54.145967
112.63617
106.5553
52.979831
119.19421
72.777157
46.447589
166.03684
Slab-10
M(+)
46.44759
M(-)
166.0368
Moment (%)
0.85M(+)
39.48045
0.70M(-)
116.2258
Moment (%) Passed
Column Strip
Beam
(85%)
Slab(15%)
(+)
33.55838
5.92207
(-)
98.79192
17.4339
(+)
(-)
Design Moments
CS
MS
2.961034
3.48357
8.716934
24.9055
For Interior
S-2
M(+)
125.4633
M(-)
305.2601
Moments (%)
0.85M(+)
106.6438
0.70M(-)
213.6821
Moment (%) Passed
Column Strip
Beam
Slab(15%)
(85%)
(+)
90.64723
15.9966
(-)
181.6298
32.0523
(+)
(-)
Middle
Strip
6.96714
49.8111
Middle
Strip
18.8195
91.578
Design Moments
CS
MS
7.998285
9.40975
16.02616
45.789
101
S-3 to
S-9
54.3891
3
111.454
M(-)
3
Moments (%)
0.85M(
46.2307
+)
6
0.70M(
78.018
-)
M(+)
Moment (%) Passed
(+)
(-)
Column Strip
Beam
Slab(15
(85%)
%)
39.2961 6.9346
4
1
11.702
66.3153
7
Middle
Strip
8.15837
33.4363
Design Moments
CS
MS
3.46730 4.0791
(+)
7
8
16.718
(-)
5.85135
1
102
Step 5. Determine the Steel Areas and Number of Bars per meter of Width
SAMPLE DESIGN
f'c
fy
B
T
D
bar
tie
cc
GIVEN DATA
MPa
20.7
MPa
415
mm
1000
mm
150
mm
114
mm
12
mm
10
mm
20
Design for Exterior

(S-1)
Column Strip (+)
R = Mu/(b*(d^2))
= (0.85*f'c/fy)*(1-(sqrt(1-((2*R)/(0.85*f'c))))
max = 0.75*0.85*f'c**600/(fy*(600+fy))
min = 1.4/fy
As = *b*d
103
M
R
i
max
min
f
RESULTS
7.25922243
0.62064
0.00152
0.01598
0.00337
0.00337
As
Abar
S
384.57831
113.09734
294.08142
kN-m
mm2
mm2
mm
Table. Summary of Steel Areas and Number of Bars for Two-Way Slabs
104
+
CS
Ext
S-1
M
S
+
+
CS
S-2
M
S
+
-
Int
+
CS
-
S-(39)
M
S
+
+
CS
Ext
S-10
M
S
+
-
Summary of Design for Two-Way Slabs (Longitudinal

(initi
(fina
M
R
al)
(max) (min)
l
7.259 0.620 0.001
0.0160 0.0034
0.0034
2
6
5
18.36 1.569 0.004
0.0160 0.0034
0.0040
09
8
0
8.540 0.730 0.001
0.0160 0.0034
0.0034
3
2
8
52.45 4.485 0.012
0.0160 0.0034
0.0127
96
1
7
7.998 0.683 0.001
0.0160 0.0034
0.0034
3
8
7
16.02 1.370 0.000
0.0160 0.0034
0.0034
62
2
1
9.409 0.804 0.002
0.0160 0.0034
0.0034
7
5
0
45.78 3.914 0.010
0.0160 0.0034
0.0108
90
8
8
3.467 0.296 0.000
0.0160 0.0034
0.0034
3
4
7
5.851 0.500 0.001
0.0160 0.0034
0.0034
3
3
2
4.079 0.348 0.000
0.0160 0.0034
0.0034
2
8
0
16.71 1.429 0.003
0.0160 0.0034
0.0036
81
3
6
2.961 0.253 0.000
0.0160 0.0034
0.0034
0
2
6
8.716 0.745 0.001
0.0160 0.0034
0.0034
9
3
8
3.483 0.297 0.000
0.0160 0.0034
0.0034
6
8
7
24.90 2.129 0.005
0.0160 0.0034
0.0055
55
3
5
105
Frame)
As
384.578
3
452.390
5
384.578
3
1449.36
4
384.578
3
384.578
3
384.578
3
1232.54
5
384.578
3
384.578
3
384.578
3
410.030
5
384.578
3
384.578
3
384.578
3
625.384
4
Abar
113.09
7
113.09
7
113.09
7
113.09
7
113.09
7
113.09
7
113.09
7
113.09
7
113.09
7
113.09
7
113.09
7
113.09
7
113.09
7
113.09
7
113.09
7
113.09
7
S
294.081
4
249.999
4
294.081
4
78.0324
294.081
4
294.081
4
294.081
4
91.7591
8
294.081
4
294.081
4
294.081
4
275.826
7
294.081
4
294.081
4
294.081
4
180.844
5
Considering Transverse Frame

The following data are given. (Slab AB as an Example)
Slab
Column
ts
150
mm
c1
550
b
1000
mm
c2
550
l1
7
m
lc
3
l2
7
m
General
DL
5.267
kPa
LL
1.9
kPa
W
9.3604
f'c
20.7
MPa
fy
415
MPa
E
21383.7
MPa
mm
mm
m
SAMPLE RESULTS (AB)

Step 1. Determine the MOI and Stiffness of Column
Ic = a*(b^3)/12
Determine lu/lc
Determine a/b
Find kab in the tables.
Kc = kab*E*Ic/h
C = (1-0.63(t/a))*((t^3)(a)/3)
Kt = 9*E*C/(l2*(1-b/l2)^2)
Kec = 4Kt*Kc/(2*Kt+2*Kc)
Step 2. Determine the MOI and Stiffness of Slab

Is = b*(t^3)/12
Compute a/l1 & b/l1
Find ks in the tables.
Find FEM and COF in the tables.
Ks = ks*E*Is/l1
106
Ic
lc
lu
lu/lc
a/b
kab
Kc
C
Kt
Kec
7.6E+09
3
2.85
0.95
1
4.55
2.5E+11
5.1E+08
1.7E+10
3.1E+10
mm4
mm
mm
Is
a/l1
b/l2
ks
FEM
COF
Ks
2E+09
0.07857
0.07857
4.11
269.692
0.5086
2.5E+10
mm4
kN-m
Figure. Design Strip for Transverse Frame

Step 3. Determine the Distribution Factors
DFxy = Kxy/K
SUMMARY OF VALUES FOR DF
Membe
r
K
DF
FEM
AB
2.5E+10 0.28438 -269.69
269.691
BA
2.5E+10 0.22141
8
BC
2.5E+10 0.22141 -269.69
269.691
CB
2.5E+10 0.28438
8
Step 4. Continue the MDM

To obtain the moments in the midspan of the slabs,
M+ = FEM - (-Mave)
MDM FOR TRANSVERSE FRAME

Membe
A
B
C
r
AB
BA
BC
CB
0.22141 0.22141
DF
0.28438
4
4
0.28438
269.691
269.691
FEM
269.692
8
-269.692
8
107
COF
0.5086
Balance 76.6949
0.5086
0.5086
CO1
Balance
-39.007
0
230.684
8
0
39.0070
4
0
TOTAL
Slab
1
0
0
346.387
-230.685
For Interior
112.7914
346.3868
Moments (%)
0.85M(+) 95.87266
0.70M(-) 242.4707
Moment (%) Passed
Column Strip
Beam
Slab(15%)
(85%)
(+)
81.49176 14.3809
(-)
206.1001 36.37061
(+)
(-)
0
0
346.386
8
Summary of Moments
W
M
346.3868
401.3272
+
112.7914
230.6848
230.6848
401.3272
+
112.7914
346.3868
For Exterior
M(+)
M(-)
0.5086
76.6949
2
M(+)
M(-)
Middle
Strip
16.9
104
112.7914
230.6848
Moments (%)
0.85M(+)
95.87266
0.70M(-)
161.4794
Moment (%) Passed
Column Strip
Beam
Slab(15%)
(85%)
(+)
81.49176
14.38
(-)
137.2575
24.22
Design Moments
CS
MS
7.190449 8.459352
18.18531 51.95801
(+)
(-)
108
Design Moments
CS
MS
7.190449
8.459
12.11095
34.6
Middle
Strip
16.918705
69.205443
109
Table. Summary of Steel Areas and Number of Bars for Two-Way Slabs
CS
Exterior
MS
CS
Interior
MS
+
+
+
+
-
Summary of Design of Two-Way Slab (Transverse Frame)

M
R
(initial) (max) (min)
(final
7.19
0.6147575 0.00151 0.015977 0.003 0.00337
18.2
1.554778 0.00393 0.015977 0.003 0.00393
8.46
0.7232441 0.00178 0.015977 0.003 0.00337
52
4.4422228 0.01257 0.015977 0.003 0.01257
7.19
0.6147575 0.00151 0.015977 0.003 0.00337
12.1
1.0354427 0.00257 0.015977 0.003 0.00337
8.46
0.7232441 0.00178 0.015977 0.003 0.00337
34.6
2.9584078 0.00786 0.015977 0.003 0.00786
110
As
385
448
385
1433
385
385
385
896
Abar
113.097
113.097
113.097
113.097
113.097
113.097
113.097
113.097
S
294.0814
252.5375
294.0814
78.94669
294.0814
294.0814
294.0814
126.2729
APPENDIX F: SAMPLE DESIGN OF COLUMNS

One-Way Slab Tradeoff
The column with the maximum axial force was designed.
P
My
b
t
cc
d
f'c
fy
bar
tie
1337.143
277.02
550
550
40
484
20.7
415
32
10
kN
kN-m
mm
mm
MPa
MPa
mm
mm
Part 1. Determine the Steel Area and Positioning of

Bars
Step 1. Determine the Steel Area and N bars
g = ____, assumed value from 0.02 0.04
Results
0.02
As = gAg
Ag
302500
mm2
N = As/Abar then determine actual As
As
mm2
Get actual g
Pcap = *0.8*Ag(0.85*f'c*(1-g)+fy*g)
If Pcap > P, the dimensions are
* adequate
* If Pcap < P, redesign
Abar
N
6050
804.247
7
8
0.02126
9
0.65
4097.28
OK
111
actual g
Pcap
mm2
pcs
kN
Step 2. Determine the

position of the bars.
Part 2. Checking of Capacity due to Eccentric Load

Step 1. Determine if Tension or Compression Controls
fy = 600*(d-c)/c, Solve for c
a = c
Pb = 0.85*f'c*a*b
Pb*(eb+x) = A's*(d-d')+0.85*f'c*a*b*(d-a/2)
Solve eb in this equation
ex = My/P
Solve ex in this equation
* If eb > e, Compression Controls, solve for fs
* If eb < e, Tension Controls, solve for f's
Step 2. Solve and check for Pcap
Since tension conrtols, f's = 600(c-d')/c
Solve for c and Pcap in the following equations
Pcap(ex+(d-c)) = A'sf's(d-d')+0.85f'c(c)b(d-c/2)
Pcap + Asfy = A'sf's + 0.85f'c(c)b
* If Pcap > P, The dimensions are adequate
* If Pcap < P, Redesign
For Two-Way Slab Tradeoff
The column with the maximun axial forces was designed.
112
Results
c
a
Pb
eb
ex
c
Pcap
286.1084
mm
0.85
243.1921
mm
2353431
kN
33.039
mm
207.173
mm
Tension Controls
272.163
2247.189
mm
kN
P
My
b
t
Cc
D
f'c
Fy
bar
tie
2424.17
363.257
550
550
40
484
20.7
415
32
10
kN
kN-m
mm
mm
MPa
MPa
mm
mm
Part 1. Determine the Steel Area and Positioning of Bars

Step 1. Determine the Steel Area and N bars
g = ____, assumed value from 0.02 - 0.04
Results
g
0.02
As = gAg
Ag
302500
mm2
N = As/Abar then determine actual As
As
6050
mm2
Get actual g
Pcap = *0.8*Ag(0.85*f'c*(1-g)+fy*g)
* If Pcap > P, the dimensions are adequate
* If Pcap < P, redesign
Abar
N
actual g
Pcap
804.2477
8
0.021269
0.65
4097.28
OK
mm2
pcs
Step 2.
Determine the
position of the bars.
113
kN
Part 2. Checking of Capacity due to Eccentric Load

Step 1. Determine if Tension or Compression Controls
fy = 600*(d-c)/c, Solve for c
a = c
Pb = 0.85*f'c*a*b
Pb*(eb+x) = A's*(d-d')+0.85*f'c*a*b*(d-a/2)
Solve eb in this equation
ex = My/P
Solve ex in this equation
* If eb > e, Compression Controls, solve for fs
* If eb < e, Tension Controls, solve for f's
Step 2. Solve and check for Pcap
Since tension conrtols, f's = 600(c-d')/c
Solve for c and Pcap in the following equations
Pcap(ex+(d-c)) = A'sf's(d-d')+0.85f'c(c)b(d-c/2)
Pcap + Asfy = A'sf's + 0.85f'c(c)b
* If Pcap > P, The dimensions are adequate
* If Pcap < P, Redesign
114
Results
c
a
Pb
eb
ex
286.1084
0.85
243.1921
2353431
33.039
149.848
Tension Controls
c
Pcap
268.6011
2873.398
mm
mm
kN
mm
mm
mm
kN
APPENDIX G: COST ESTIMATE

COST ESTIMATE - ONE WAY TRADEOFF
Member
B-1
B-2
B-3
C-1
Slab
S-1
S-2
S-3
S-4
L
(m)
7
3.5
3
3
b
(m)
0.35
0.35
0.35
0.55
L
(m)
7
7
3.5
3.3
b
(m)
3.5
3
3.3
3
ITEM
TOTAL
CEMENT
9662.96
SAND
536.831
GRAVEL
1073.66
B-1
B-2
B-2
C-1
Slonger
Sshorter
BAR
(mm)
25
26
25
32
12
12
ITEM
TOTAL
Steel
98654.5
Member
CONCRETE WORKS
t
V
pcs
(m)
(m3)
0.5
170
208.25
0.5
50
30.625
0.5
180
94.5
0.55
260
235.95
TOTAL
t
V
pcs
(m)
(m3)
0.15
30
110.25
0.15
120
378
0.15
5
8.6625
0.15
5
7.425
CEMENT
(bags)
1874.25
275.625
850.5
2123.55
5123.93
CEMENT
(bags)
992.25
3402
77.9625
66.825
TOTAL
4539.038
PRICES
ITEM
LABOR
bags
2415741 966296.3
26841.5
m3
50
10736.63
6
m3
800
858930
343572
TOTAL PRICE
3301512 1320605
REBAR WORKS
As
L
NN bars
2
members
(mm )
(m)
490.873
7
6
170
530.929
3.5
6
50
490.873
3
6
180
804.247
3
8
260
113.097
50
224
113.097
14
500
PRICE
per kg
ITEM
LABOR
TOTAL
513003
52
1026008 6156046
8
per pc
250
TOTAL COST
115
10778163
TOTAL
4622117
Total W
(kg)
27162.5
4320.436
12325.84
38893.42
9816.849
6135.53
SAND
(m)
104.125
15.3125
47.25
117.975
284.66
SAND
(m)
55.125
189
4.33125
3.7125
252.168
8
GRAVEL
(m)
208.25
30.625
94.5
235.95
569.325
GRAVEL
(m)
110.25
378
8.6625
7.425
504.3375
COST ESTIMATE - TWO WAY TRADEOFF
Member
B-1
B-2
B-3
C-1
Slab
S-1
S-2
S-3
S-4
S-5
L
(m)
7
3.5
4.5
3
b
(m)
0.35
0.35
0.35
0.5
L1
(m)
7
7
3.7
4.5
3.7
L2
(m)
7
4.5
3.5
3.3
1
ITEM
TOTAL
CEMEN
T
7894.12
5
438.562
5
877.125
SAND
GRAVEL
Member
BAR
(mm)
B-1
25
B-2
26
B-2
25
C-1
Slonger
Sshorter
32
12
12
ITEM
TOTAL
CONCRETE WORKS
t
V
pcs
(m)
(m3)
0.5
140
171.5
0.5
20
12.25
0.5
120
94.5
0.5
165
123.75
TOTAL
t
V
pcs
(m)
(m3)
0.15
10
73.5
0.15
80
378
0.15
5
9.7125
0.15
5
11.1375
0.15
5
2.775
per pc
bags
TOTAL
PRICES
ITEM
LABOR
1973531 789412.5
21928.1
m3
50
3
8771.25
3
m
800
701700
280680
TOTAL PRICE
2697159
1078864
REBAR WORKS
As
L
NN bars
2
members
(mm )
(m)
490.873
9
7
7
140
530.929
2
3.5
6
20
490.873
9
4.5
6
120
804.247
8
7
3
165
215
113.0973
50
113.0973
14
425
PRICE
per kg
ITEM
LABOR
TOTAL
CEMENT
(bags)
1543.5
110.25
850.5
1113.75
3618
CEMENT
(bags)
661.5
3402
87.4125
100.2375
24.975
4276.125
250
116
TOTAL
3776023
Total W
(kg)
26097.31
1728.174
12325.84
24682.36
9422.422
5215.201
SAND
(m)
85.75
6.125
47.25
61.875
201
SAND
(m)
36.75
189
4.85625
5.56875
1.3875
237.562
5
GRAVEL
(m)
171.5
12.25
94.5
123.75
402
GRAVEL
(m)
73.5
378
9.7125
11.1375
2.775
475.125
Steel
79471.3
1
52
4132508
826501.
6
TOTAL COST
117
4959010
8735033
APPENDIX H: ESTIMATE OF MAN HOURS
For Tradeoff 1 (One Way Slab)
B-1
B-2
B-3
C-1
S-1
S-2
S-3
S-4
b
350
350
350
550
t
150
150
150
150
T
L
500
7
500
3
500
3.5
550
3
S
l
3.5
7
3
7
3.3
3.5
3
3.3
TOTAL VOLUME
Quantity
170
180
50
250
Volume
208.25
94.5
30.625
226.875
25
115
5
5
91.875
362.25
8.6625
7.425
1030.463
Assuming that 500% of Total Volume of Concrete Works is equal to Total Man Days,
Adding 200% For Rebar Works and 350% For
Finishing
TOTAL MAN DAYS = 5(1030.463) + 2(1030.463) +
3.5(1030.463)
TOTAL MAN DAYS = 10820
days
Given that there will be 25 workers
TOTAL MAN DAYS = 435 Days
118
For Tradeoff 1 (Two Way Slab)
B-1
B-2
B-3
C-1
S-1
S-2
S-3
S-4
b
350
350
350
550
t
150
150
150
150
t
500
500
500
550
s
7
4.5
3.3
3
TOTAL VOLUME
L
7
4.5
3.5
3
l
7
7
3.5
3.3
Quantity
135
120
20
165
Volume
165.375
94.5
12.25
149.7375
10
80
5
5
73.5
378
8.6625
7.425
889.45
Assuming that 500% of Total Volume of Concrete Works is equal to Total Man Days,
Adding 200% For Rebar Works and 350% For Finishing
TOTAL MAN DAYS = 5(889.45) + 2(889.45) + 3.5(889.45)
TOTAL MAN DAYS = 9940 days
Given that there will be 25 workers
TOTAL MAN DAYS = 375 Days
119
APPENDIX I: PERCENTAGE DEFLECTION FROM ALLOWABLE
Tradeoff 1 (One Way Slab)

(Beam with maximum moment was used)
Beam Deflection at Midspan
0.30585 mm
Allowable Deflection
19.4444
4
mm
Percentage of Computed Deflection from Allowable
% = (LV/HV)*100%
% = 1.5729 %
Tradeoff 2 (Two Way Slab)

(Beam with maximum moment was used)
Beam Deflection at Midspan
1.10473 mm
Allowable Deflection
19.4444
4
mm
Percentage of Computed Deflection from Allowable
% = (LV/HV)*100%
% = 5.68148 %
120
APPENDIX H: REFERENCES
Manuals
Choi K. K. (2002). Reinforced Concrete Structure Design Assistant Tool. California, USA
Dahlgren A., & Svensson L. (2013). Guidelines and Rules for Detailong of Reinforcement in
Concrete Structures. Goteborg, Sweden.
Al-Shamma A. K. (2013). Novel Flowchart for Design of Concrete Rectangular Beams.
International Journal of Scientific & Engineering Research.
Manual for Design and Detailing of Reinforced Concrete to the Code of Practice for Structural Use
of Concrete, 2013
Books
Everrad & Tanner (1996). Theory and Problems of Reinforced Concrete Design. New York:
Schaum Publishing Company.
McCormac, J.C., & Brown, R. H. (2014). Design of Reinforced Concrete 9 th Edition. United States:
John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
Association of Structural Engineers of the Philippines. National Structural Code of the Philippines
2010. Quezon City, Philippines: Association of Structural Engineers of the Philippines, Inc.
National Building Code of the Philippines (1977). Philippines.
Websites
www.google.com
www.wikipedia.com
http://www.bca.gov.sg/publications/BuildabilitySeries/others/prh_s2.pdf
http://elearning.vtu.ac.in/P6/enotes/CV61/Beams-GS.pdf
121

Reinforced Concrete Design of A 5 Storey Seminary Main Building

Enviado por

Dados do documento

Título original

Direitos autorais

Formatos disponíveis

Compartilhar este documento

Compartilhar ou incorporar documento

Opções de compartilhamento

Você considera este documento útil?

Este conteúdo é inapropriado?

Direitos autorais:

Formatos disponíveis

Reinforced Concrete Design of A 5 Storey Seminary Main Building

Enviado por

Direitos autorais:

Formatos disponíveis

TECHNOLOGICAL INSTITUTE OF THE PHILIPPINES

938 Aurora Boulevard Cubao, Quezon City

A Project in Partial Fulfilment for the Requirements in

A DESIGN OF A FIVE STOREY REINFORCED CONCRETE

Engr. Rhonnie Estores

4.1.2 Design Specifications....................................................................................................................33

Table 1. Total Floor Areas and Functions per Floor........................................................................................15

Figure 30. Column Details..............................................................................................................................57

CHAPTER I - PROJECT BACKGROUND

1.2 The Project

Figure 1. Perspective of the Proposed Seminary

1.3 Project Location

Figure 2. Distance of the Nearest Fault Line to the Structure

Figure 3. Vicinity Map of the Seminary

1.4 Project Objectives

1.5 The Client

1.6 Project Scope and Limitation

Only beams, slabs, and columns were considered in the design.

1.7 Project Development

IDENTIFICATION OF DESIGN STANDARDS

PRESENTATION OF ARCHITECTURAL AND STRUCTURAL PLANS WITH INITIAL ESTIMATE

IDENTIFICATION OF DESIGN CONSTRAINTS,

LOAD IDENTIFICATION, STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS,

Figure 4. Project Development Process

CHAPTER 2: DESIGN INPUTS

2.1 Description of the Structure

and columns while the violet members

Ramps and Elevator

Class Rooms & Laboratories

Ramps and Elevator

Ramps and Elevator

Vice Rectors and Prefects Room

Toilet & Bath

Ramps and Elevator

Toilet & Bath

TOTAL FLOOR AREA

2.2 Classification of the Structure

2.3 Architectural Plans

Figure 6. Floor Plans of the Building

CHAPTER 3: DESIGN CONSTRAINTS, TRADE-OFFS, AND STANDARDS

2. Sustainability. In civil engineering, sustainability refers to the conditions under which a

3.2.1 One Way Slab

Figure 7. One Way Slab System

3.2.2 Two Way Slab

Figure 8. Two Way Slab System

3.3 Significance of Chosen Tradeoffs to the Quantitative Design Constraints

3.4 Method of Measurements for Quantitative Constraints

3.5 Ranking Scale

Figure 9. Ranking Scale for Importance Factor

Figure 10. Ranking Scale for Satisfactory Factor

Computation of ranking for ability to satisfy criterion of materials:

Higher valueLower value

Subordinate rank =Governing rank (

3.6 Initial Estimate and Ranking Computation

Computation of ranking for Economic Constraint

higher valuelower value

Subordinate rank =Governing rank (

Subordinate rank =51.11

Subordinate rank =3.89

Computation of ranking for Constructability Constraint

higher valuelower value

Subordinate rank =Governing rank

Subordinate rank =52