Mr. Dinesh Shrestha (Structural Report)

A REPORT ON
STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS & DESIGN OF

RESIDENTIAL BUILDING
OF
MR. DINESH SHRESTHA
LOCATION:
LMC-28, HARISIDDHI- , LALITPUR
DESIGNED BY:
SANTOSH KUMAR HATHI
NEC REG NO. : 8152 CIVIL ‘A’
AUG., 2023
This Page is intentionally left blank
Structural Analysis and Design of Residential Building Of Mr. Dinesh Shrestha
Table of Contents
LIST OF TABLES.................................................................................................................................................. II
LIST OF FIGURES................................................................................................................................................ II
1INTRODUCTION.......................................................................................................................................... 1
1.1 AN OVERVIEW OF EARTHQUAKE-RESISTANT DESIGN.......................................................................................................1
1.2 EARTHQUAKE RESISTANT DESIGN PHILOSOPHY..............................................................................................................2
2 DESCRIPTION OF THE BUILDING.................................................................................................................. 3

2.1 BUILDING DESCRIPTION.............................................................................................................................................3
3 NUMERICAL MODELING.............................................................................................................................. 6
4 STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS............................................................................................................................... 8
4.1 LOAD CASES CONSIDERED..........................................................................................................................................8
4.2 LOAD COMBINATION................................................................................................................................................9
4.3 DEAD LOADS...........................................................................................................................................................9
4.4 LIVE LOADS...........................................................................................................................................................10
4.5 SEISMIC LOADS (EARTHQUAKE LOADS).......................................................................................................................11
4.5.1 Equivalent Static Method............................................................................................................................11
Ultimate Limit State................................................................................................................................................. 11
Serviceability Limit State..........................................................................................................................................11
HORIZONTAL SEISMIC BASE SHEAR...................................................................................................................................11
VERTICAL DISTRIBUTION OF SEISMIC FORCES......................................................................................................................11
4.5.2 Dynamic Analysis........................................................................................................................................12
4.6 ANALYSIS & DESIGN PARAMETERS............................................................................................................................14
4.7 STOREY DISPLACEMENT & DRIFT..............................................................................................................................23
4.1 STOREY DISPLACEMENT & DRIFT..............................................................................................................................25
4.2 ANALYSIS OF FORCES AND MOMENTS IN FRAMES............................................................................................27
4.3 DESIGN..............................................................................................................................................................29
4.4 DESIGN SUMMARY.................................................................................................................................................29
5 CONCLUSION............................................................................................................................................ 30
6 RECOMMENDATIONS................................................................................................................................ 30
ANNEXES......................................................................................................................................................... 31
ANNEX -I: REFERENCES.................................................................................................................................................. 31
ANNEX-II: SAMPLE DESIGN CALCULATIONS........................................................................................................................32
Beam Design.............................................................................................................................................................32
Column Design.........................................................................................................................................................33
Slab Design...............................................................................................................................................................34
Raft Foundation Design...........................................................................................................................................38
LIST OF TABLES
i|Page
Designed By: Er. Santosh kr. hathi
Table 3-1: Building Description.......................................................................................................................................5
Table 4-1: Unit weight of Materials................................................................................................................................9
Table 4-2: Wall loads Applied to the Frames..................................................................................................................9
Table 4-3: Live Loads.....................................................................................................................................................10
Table 4-4: Auto Seismic Weight from Modal Analysis in ETABS V19.......................................................................12
Table 4-5: Analysis & Design Parameters....................................................................................................................14
Table 4-6: Storey Drift at ultimate limit state...............................................................................................................15
Table 4-7: Column Design Summary............................................................................................................................21
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 3-1: Typical Floor Plan of the building................................................................................................................3

Figure 3-2 Sectional Elevation of the Building...............................................................................................................4
Figure 4-1: Three Dimensional view of Model created in ETABS V19.............................................................................6
Figure 4-2: Typical Floor Plan as viewed in a Model created in ETABS V19...................................................................7
Figure 4-3: Typical Elevation as viewed in a Model created in ETABS V19....................................................................7
Figure 4-4: Sample Bending Moment Diagram.............................................................................................................19
Figure 4-5: Sample Shear Force Diagram......................................................................................................................19
Figure 4-6: Sample Axial Force Diagram.......................................................................................................................20
Figure 4-7: Sample Torsion Diagram.............................................................................................................................20
ii | P a g e
Designed By: Er. Santosh kr. hathi
1 INTRODUCTION
1.1 AN OVERVIEW OF EARTHQUAKE-RESISTANT DESIGN
Nepal lies in an earthquake prone zone. It is located in the boundary between Indian plate and Tibetan
plate. Thus, Nepal experiences earthquakes frequently. Earthquakes are the most sudden, dramatic and
devastating natural calamities. Although they last only for few seconds to minutes, they are the most
devastating ones. Past records of the earthquake show that eighteen major earthquakes have hit Nepal till
now. So, special consideration of earthquake forces while designing a building is mandatory in Nepal.
Designing building against earthquake forces does not mean that we are making the building earthquake-
proof. Although earthquake proof structures may be viable in terms of engineering but they are not fi-
nancially viable. However, it is possible to design and build earthquake-resilient (more precisely seismic
resilient) structures. According to this philosophy, no matter how much severe earthquake occurs, the
building won’t collapse although it may be irreparably damaged. In, this background, it is ensured that
this building has been designed to withstand all the acting loads including the earthquake forces making
it seismic resistant.
The structural design alone is not enough to ensure the safety of a building, equally important, is its con -
struction. The role of a contractor is of paramount importance as he is the one to execute the construction
work at site. He is required to execute the work according to drawings supplied by the consultant to him
and detailing has to be carefully followed. A large percentage of failure of the building is attributed to
poor quality of construction. Past experiences from damages have shown that quality of material and
workmanship play an important role in good seismic behavior of the buildings. Hence, quality assurance
of construction works is the key to good seismic performance of a building.
Severity of ground shaking at a given location during an earthquake can be minor, moderate and strong.
Relatively, minor shakings occur frequently, moderate shakings occasionally and strong shakings rarely.
For instance, on average annually about 800 earthquakes of magnitude 5.0-5.9 on Richter scale occur in
the world while the number is only about 19 for magnitude of range 7.0-7.9 on Richter scale. So, should
we design and construct a building to resist that rare earthquake shaking that may come only once in 500
years or even once in 2000 years at the chosen project site, even though the life of the building itself may
be only 50 or 100 years? Since it costs money to provide additional earthquake safety in buildings, a
conflict arises: Should we do away with the design of buildings for earthquake effects? Or should we de-
sign the buildings to be “earthquake proof” wherein there is no damage during the strong but rare earth-
quake shaking? Clearly, the former approach can lead to a major disaster, and the second approach is too
expensive. Hence, the design philosophy should lie somewhere in between these two extremes.
The engineers do not attempt to make earthquake proof buildings that will not get damaged even during
the rare but strong earthquakes; such buildings will be too robust and also too expensive. Instead, the en -
gineering intention is to make buildings earthquake resistant and affordable; such buildings resist the ef -
fects of ground shaking, although they may get damaged severely but would not collapse during the
strong earthquake. Thus, safety of people and contents is assured in earthquake-resistant buildings, and
thereby a disaster is avoided. This is a major objective of seismic design codes throughout the world.
1|Page
Designed By: Er. Santosh kr.hathi
1.2 EARTHQUAKE RESISTANT DESIGN PHILOSOPHY
The earthquake design philosophy may be summarized as follows:
a) Under minor shakings which occur frequently, the main members of the buildings that carry vertical
and lateral forces should not be damaged; however non-structural parts may sustain repairable damages.
It is assured that the building will be fully operational within a short time and the repair costs will be
small
b) Under moderate shakings which are occasional, the structural elements may sustain repairable dam-
age, while the non-structural elements may be heavily damaged; the building will be operational fol-
lowed by repair and re-strengthening of the damaged structural elements and replacing of damaged non-
structural elements.
c) Under strong shakings which are rare, the main members may sustain severe damage, but the building
should not collapse; the building may become dysfunctional for further use, but will stand so that people
can be evacuated and property recovered.
The degree to which the building is to be assured against the possibility of damage must be considered
while designing the building. Important buildings like hospitals, health posts, fire stations, post offices
communication towers, electric power houses which play a critical role in post-earthquake activities
must remain functional immediately after the earthquake and hence require higher degree of assurance
against possible damage. Public buildings, educational buildings, busy commercial complex etc. where
the risk of human loss is high and some critical structures like nuclear power plants, dams, etc. whose
collapse may cause secondary disasters are also designed to assure higher level of safety against earth-
quakes. Other buildings like residential buildings, offices, mercantile buildings etc. are designed for
lower level of safety, while the design philosophy mentioned above is always maintained. However, the
level of safety to be assured in the design may also depend upon the demand of the client.
Design of buildings to resist earthquakes involves controlling the damage to acceptable levels at a rea-
sonable cost. Contrary to the common thinking that any crack in the building after an earthquake means
the building is unsafe for habitation, some damage in non-structural elements may be unavoidable. Dif-
ferent types of damages (mainly visualized through cracks; especially so in concrete and masonry build -
ings) may occur in buildings during earthquakes. Some of these cracks are acceptable (in terms of both
their size and location), while others are not. In general, qualified technical professionals may only be
knowledgeable of the causes and severity of damage in earthquake-resistant buildings.
2|Page
2 DESCRIPTION OF THE BUILDING
2.1 BUILDING DESCRIPTION

The building to be analyzed and designed here is aResidentialbuilding at Harishiddhi-28, Lalitpur. The owner of
the building is Mr. Dinesh Shrestha. The plinth area of the building is 74.46Sq. m.The proposed site is located at
Harishiddhi-28, Lalitpur.TheTypical floor plan and section of the building are presented below in Figure 2-1: The
building description is presented in figure below:
Figure 2-1: Typical Floor Plan of the building
3|Page
Figure 2-2 Sectional Elevation of the Building
4|Page
Table 2-1: Building Description

General features
Building Type ResidentialBuilding
Location Harisiddhi-28, Lalitpur
Plinth Area 74.46 Sq. m.
Architectural features
Number of storey 5Storey including Stair-Cover
Floor Height All Floor:2.896 m
Total Height of the Building: 14.484m up to top floor slab of Roof Cover
Along X:
Building Lateral Dimensions 8.025 m
(Maximum ) Along Y:
10.379 m
Brick Masonry in Concrete Mortar outside walls as well as
Wall and Partition
partition walls
Structural features
Structural System Special Moment Resisting RCC Frame Structure
Foundation Type Raft Footing
Columns Rectangular RCC Columns
Beams Rectangular RCC Beams
Slab RCC slab
Geotechnical Features
Soil Test Available
Soil Type D (as per NBC 105:2020)
Seismic Zone Factor 0.35 (as per NBC 105:2020) (for Lalitpur)
Allowable bearing capacity as-
110 KN/m2
sumed
Information on Materials
M20Used in Columns, Beams,Slab, Secondary beams And M20
Concrete Used:
Foundation, Staircase, RCC Bands.
Reinforcement Steel used: Fe 500 for beams , columns , slab and Foundation
Clay Brick Masonry in cement
For Brick masonry walls
sand mortar
Cement Sand Mortar For Plastering
25000 Mpa for M25
Young’s Modulus of Elasticity 5000 √fck for concrete
22361 Mpa for M20
of materials
1.99 x10^5 Mpa
0.20 for concrete
Poisson’s Ratio Considered
0.30 for rebar
Analysis and Design Tools ETABS V19.1.0for Analysis and Design of Frame structure
(Software)
5|Page
3 NUMERICAL MODELING
A three-dimensional finite element model of the whole structural system is created in ETABS V19.1.0.
The structural system is considered as a Special Moment Resisting Frame structure. Main components to
be modeled are: Beams, Columns & Slabs. Beams and columns are modeled as frame elements while
slabs are modeled as four-noded shell elements. The support condition at the base is idealized as a fixed
support and hence any moment release at the base of columns is neglected. Any moment release at the
beam/column joints is also neglected. Self-weight of the walls and parapet wallsare applied onto the
beams in the form of uniformly distributed loads.
Figure 3-3: Three Dimensional view of Model created in ETABS V19.1.0
6|Page
Figure 3-4: Typical Floor Plan as viewed in a Model created in ETABS V19.1.0
7|Page
Figure 3-5: Typical Elevation as viewed in a Model created in ETABS V19.1.0
4 STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS
For the purpose of structural analysis various Indian Standard Codes are followed for loadings and
NBC105:2020 for load combinations and other analysis procedures.
4.1 LOAD CASES CONSIDERED
Following load Cases have been considered for analysis of the building as per NBC 105: 2020.
1. Dead Load (DL)
2. Live load (LL)
3. Earthquake load in+veX-direction (EQX_ULS)
4. Earthquake load in –ve X-direction (-EQX_ULS)
5. Earthquake load in +ve Y-direction (EQY_ULS)
6. Earthquake load in –ve Y-direction (-EQY_ULS)
8|Page
7. Earthquake load in +veX-direction (EQX_SLS)

8. Earthquake load in –ve X-direction (-EQX_SLS)
9. Earthquake load in +veY-direction (EQY _SLS)
10. Earthquake load in –ve Y-direction (-EQY_ULS)
Where,
ULS =Ultimate Limit State
SLS= Servicebility Limit State
4.2 LOAD COMBINATION
Following load combinations for non-parallel system as per NBC 105: 2020 for Equivalent StaticAnaly-
sis.
1. NBC 101: 1.2DL+1.5LL

2. NBC 102: DL+0.3LL+(Eqx(SLS)+0.30Eqy(SLS))
3. NBC 103: DL+0.3LL-(Eqx(SLS)+0.30Eqy(SLS))
4. NBC 104: DL+0.3LL+(Eqy(SLS)+0.30Eqx(SLS))
5. NBC 105: DL+0.3LL-(Eqy(SLS)+0.30Eqx(SLS))
6. NBC 106: DL+0.3LL+(Eqx(ULS)+0.30Eqy(SLS))
7. NBC 107: DL+0.3LL-(Eqx(ULS)+0.30Eqy(ULS))
8. NBC 108: DL+0.3LL+(Eqy(ULS)+0.30Eqx(ULS))
9. NBC 109: DL+0.3LL-(Eqy(ULS)+0.30Eqy(ULS))
Where, DL = Dead Load

LL = Live Load
Eqx(ULS) = Static Earthquake loading for ULS along X -Direction
Eqy(ULS) = Static Earthquake loading for ULS along Y -Direction
Eqx(SLS) = Static Earthquake loading for SLS along X -Direction
Eqy(SLS) = Static Earthquake loading for SLS along Y –Direction
4.3 DEAD LOADS
Dead loads are assumed to be produced by slab, beams, columns, walls, parapet walls, plasters and mor-
tars and floor finish. The weight of building materials are taken as per IS 875 (Part 1-1987).
Table 4-2: Unit weight of Materials
Specific weight of materials [Ref: IS: 875(Part 1)-1987)]
Materials Unit weight(γ)
Reinforced Concrete 25.00 KN/m³
Brick Masonry 19.20 KN/m³
9|Page
Floor Finishing (Screeding & punning) 23.00 KN/m³

Cement Sand Plaster 20.40 KN/m³
Wall Loads
The wall loads are applied to the associated beams as uniformly distributed loads. Reduction for the
openings is made wherever necessary.
UDL due to wall = height * thickness * sp. weight
Table 4-3: Wall loads Applied to the Frames
Stor Bea Net Adopt

wall Wall UDL Wall
ey m UDL ed
S.N thick- Heig in Open-
heig Dept in UDL Remarks
o. ness ht (KN/ ing
ht h (KN/ (KN/
(m) (m) m) (%)
(m) (m) m) m)
2.89 11.24 2.896m storey height &
1 0.23 0.35 2.546 11.24 0 11
6 31 230mm thick wall
2.89 10.11
0.23 0.35 2.546 11.24 10 10
6 88
2.89 8.994
0.23 0.35 2.546 11.24 20 9
6 51
2.89 6.208 2.896m storey height &
2 0.127 0.35 2.546 6.21 0 6
6 17 127mm thick wall
2.89 5.587
0.127 0.35 2.546 6.21 10 6
6 35
2.89 4.966
0.127 0.35 2.546 6.21 20 5
6 53
4.4 LIVE LOADS
Live loads are applied on floor slabs on the basis of usage of rooms, as specified in IS 875 part II.
Table 4-4: Live Loads
Bed Rooms 2.00 KN/m2
Toilet/ Bathrooms 2.00 KN/m2
Balcony/ Stairs/Lobby/hallway/Passage 3.00 KN/m2
Dinning Hall 3.00 KN/m2
Terrace/Roof accessible 1.5 KN/m2
Terrace/Roof inaccessible 0.75 KN/m2
10 | P a g e
4.5 SEISMIC LOADS (EARTHQUAKE LOADS)
4.5.1 EQUIVALENT STATIC METHOD

ULTIMATE LIMIT STATE
For the ultimate limit state, the horizontal base shear coefficient (design coefficient), C d (T1), shall
C (T 1)
be given by: C d ( T 1 ) =
Rµ x Ωu
Where,
C(T1) = Elastic Site Spectra as per 6.1.1 NBC 105: 2020
Rµ = Ductility Factor
𝛀u = Over strength Factor for ULS
SERVICEABILITY LIMIT STATE
For the serviceability limit state, the horizontal base shear coefficient (design coefficient), C d (T1),
Cs ( T 1 )
shall be given by: C d ( T 1 ) =
Ωs
Where,
Cs(T1) = Elastic Site Spectra determined for Serviceability Limit State as per 6.1.2 NBC
105:2020
𝛀s= Over strength Factor for SLS
HORIZONTAL SEISMIC BASE SHEAR

The horizontal seismic base shear,V, acting at the base of the structure, in the direction being con-
sidered, shall be calculated as:
V = Cd(T1) W
Where,
Cd(T1) = Horizontal base shear coefficient as per 6.3 NBC 105: 2020
W = Seismic Weight of the structure
VERTICAL DISTRIBUTION OF SEISMIC FORCES

The lateral seismic force (Fi) induced at each level ‘i’ shall be calculated as:
k
W i hi
F i= n
xV
∑ W i hki
i
Where,
Wi = seismic weight of the structure assigned to level ‘i’;
hi= height (m) from the base to level ‘i’;
n= total number of floors/levels
V= horizontal seismic base shear calculated as per 6.2
k= an exponent related to the structural period as follows:
11 | P a g e
 for structure having time period T≤0.5sec, k=1
 for structure having time period T≥2.5sec, k=2
for structure having period between 0.5 sec and 2.5 sec, k shall be determined by linear interpola-
tion between 1 and 2.
4.5.2 DYNAMIC ANALYSIS

Model Response Spectrum Method
The Dynamic analysis was performed using a curve of spectral shape factor offered by NBC
105 :2020. The Curve used for modal response spectrum method is shown below.
For the purpose of analysis, seismic forces are applied to the model of the building created in ETABS
V19.1.0. Hence, the manual calculations of seismic weight, base shear and the seismic forces have not
been shown. However, the ETABS V19.1.0 outputs for the Seismic Weight, Base Shear and Storey
Drifts and Modal Analysis are shown in the tabulated form.
Modal Analysis
No of modes considered for Modal Analysis: 12
Effective Mass Participation for Modes Considered: more than 90% in Global X and Y directions
Therefore the requirement is fulfilled as per NBC105:2020
Table 4-5: Auto Seismic Weight from Modal Analysis in ETABS V19.1.0
TABLE: Load Pattern Definitions - Auto Seismic - User Coefficient

Weight Base
Name Ecc Ratio Top Story Bottom Story C K Used Shear
kN kN
0.13 1.09 581.112
EQX_SLS 0.1 TOP base 1 8 4435.972 3
12 | P a g e
0.12 1.09 558.932

EQX_ULS 0.1 TOP base 6 8 4435.972 5
0.13 1.09 581.112
EQY_SLS 0.1 TOP base 1 8 4435.972 3
0.12 1.09 558.932
EQY_ULS 0.1 TOP base 6 8 4435.972 5
Table 4-5: Modal Participating Mass Ratiofrom Modal Analysis in ETABS V19.1.0
TABLE: Modal Participating Mass Ratios

Case Mode Period UX UY SumUX SumUY
sec
Modal 1 0.95 0.7961 0.0049 0.7961 0.0049
Modal 2 0.896 0.0013 0.8131 0.7975 0.818
Modal 3 0.805 0.0391 0.0233 0.8366 0.8413
Modal 4 0.307 0.0909 0.0003 0.9275 0.8416
Modal 5 0.297 0.0001 0.0896 0.9276 0.9312
Modal 6 0.257 0.0117 0.0068 0.9393 0.9379
Modal 7 0.195 0.0098 0.0204 0.9492 0.9583
Modal 8 0.187 0.0165 0.0081 0.9656 0.9664
Modal 9 0.162 3.74E-05 7.39E-06 0.9657 0.9664
Modal 10 0.147 0.0203 0.0012 0.986 0.9676
Modal 11 0.143 0.0021 0.0223 0.988 0.9899
Modal 12 0.129 0.0024 0.0013 0.9905 0.9912
13 | P a g e
4.6 ANALYSIS &DESIGN PARAMETERS
Followings factors are considered for earthquake resistant design of the building.
Table 4-6: Analysis & Design Parameters for Equivalent Static Method.
For loading
Eqx+-(U) Eqx+-(S)
Eqx+-(U) Eqx+-(S)
Storey Seismic mass at diff level M Seismic weight at diff H (m) Di(m) Di(m) Kt(for moment resisting 0.075
(Kg) level W (KN) steel frame)=
top 19443.69 190.677 2.896 0.0518 0.0499 Total height of structure= 14.484
third 93597.55 917.878 2.896 0.0449 0.0432 Spectral shape factor 2.25
Ch(T)=
second 113689.41 1114.912 2.896 0.0370 0.0356 Zone(Z)= 0.35
first 113689.41 1114.912 2.896 0.0248 0.0239 Importance factor(I)= 1
ground 111923.16 1097.591 2.896 0.0103 0.0099
Sum of seismic weight= 4435.972 KN Ductility factor (R)= 4

Overstrength factor for 1.5
ULS=
Time period from empirical formula= 0.557 sec Overstrength factor for 1.25
SLS=
For ulimate limit State

elastic site spectra for ULS C(T)= 0.7875
horizontal base shear coefficient for ULS Cd(T1)= 0.131
Horizontal seismic base shear for ULS= 582.22
14 | P a g e
Note: while calcultaingthe lateral seismic force

XV

· for structure having time period T≤0.5sec, k=1
· for structure having time period T≥2.5sec, k=2
· for structure having period between 0.5 sec and 2.5 sec, k shall be determined by linear interpolation between 1 and 2.
Storey W (KN) H (m) W*Hk F(KN) Di(m) Wd2 Fd

top 190.677 2.896 612.85 94.8835 0.0518 0.512 4.918
third 917.878 2.896 917.88 142.1090 0.0449 1.851 6.382
second 1114.912 2.896 1114.9 172.6144 0.0370 1.526 6.386
first 1114.912 2.896 1114.9 172.6144 0.0248 0.688 4.287
ground 1097.591 2.896 1097.6 169.9327 0.0103 0.115 1.742
Sum= 3338.380 3760.6 4.577 21.973
T= 0.916 From Rayleigh

Tapx mod = 0.696 From empirical
Tmin = 0.696
15 | P a g e
Figure 4-1Spectral Shape Factor, Ch(T) for Equivalent Static Method
Spectral shape factor for new time periodCh(T)= 2.25

For Serviceablility limit State

elastic site spectra for SLS C(T)= 0.1575
horizontal base shear coefficient for SLS Cd(T1)= 0.126
Horizontal seismic base shear for SLS= 558.93

XV


top 190.677 2.896 552.2 31.9244 0.0499 0.474 1.592
third 917.878 2.896 2658.2 153.6769 0.0432 1.713 6.638
16 | P a g e
second 1114.912 2.896 3228.8 186.6656 0.0356 1.412 6.642

first 1114.912 2.896 3228.8 186.6656 0.0239 0.636 4.459
ground 1097.591 2.896 3178.6 183.7656 0.0099 0.107 1.812
Sum= 3338.380 9667.9 4.235 19.331

Tmin = 0.696

17 | P a g e
For loading
Eqy+-(U) Eqy+-(S)
Eqy+-(U) Eqy+-(S)
Storey Seismic Mass at diff level Seismic weight at diff H (m) Di(m) Di(m) Kt(for moment resisting 0.075
(Kg) level W (KN) steel frame)=
top 19443.69 190.677 2.896 0.0451 0.0434 Total height of structure= 14.48 m
4
third 93597.55 917.878 2.896 0.0400 0.0384 Spectral shape factor 2.25 m
Ch(T)=
second 113689.41 1114.912 2.896 0.0332 0.0319 Zone(Z)= 0.35
first 113689.41 1114.912 2.896 0.0225 0.0216 Importance factor(I)= 1
ground 111923.16 1097.591 2.896 0.0095 0.0091
Sum of seismic weight= 4435.972 KN Ductility factor (R)= 4

Overstrength factor for 1.5
ULS=
Time period from empirical formula= 0.557 sec Overstrength factor for 1.25
SLS=
For ulimate limit State

Horizontal seismic base shear for ULS= 582.221

XV

18 | P a g e

top 190.677 2.896 552.2019 33.2546 0.0451 0.38 1.501
8
third 917.878 2.896 2658.176 160.0801 0.0400 1.46 6.396
5
second 1114.912 2.896 3228.786 194.4433 0.0332 1.23 6.458
0
first 1114.912 2.896 3228.786 194.4433 0.0225 0.56 4.374
4
ground 1097.591 2.896 3178.624 191.4225 0.0095 0.09 1.816
9
Sum= 3338.380 9667.95 3.64 18.72

7 8

Tmin = 0.696
19 | P a g e

For Serviceablility limit State

elastic site spectra for SLS C(T)= 0.1575
horizontal base shear coefficient for SLS Cd(T1)= 0.126
Horizontal seismic base shear for SLS= 558.9324

XV


top 190.677 2.896 552.2019 31.9244 0.0434 0.35 1.386
9
third 917.878 2.896 2658.176 153.6769 0.0384 1.35 5.905
5
second 1114.912 2.896 3228.786 186.6656 0.0319 1.13 5.963
8
first 1114.912 2.896 3228.786 186.6656 0.0216 0.52 4.039
20 | P a g e
2
ground 1097.591 2.896 3178.624 183.7656 0.0091 0.09 1.677
1
Sum= 3338.380 9667.95 3.37 17.29

4 3

Tmin = 0.696

21 | P a g e
22 | P a g e
4.7 STOREYDISPLACEMENT &DRIFT
Table 4-7: Storey Drift at ultimate limit state

TABLE: Story Drifts
Story Output Case Case Type Direction Drift 4*Drift
0.00702
top Eqx (ULS) LinStatic X 0.001756 4
top Eqx (ULS) LinStatic X 0.00189 0.00756
0.00699
top Eqx (ULS) LinStatic X 0.001748 2
0.00646
top Eqy (ULS) LinStatic Y 0.001616 4
0.00642
0.00682
0.01202
third Eqx (ULS) LinStatic X 0.003006 4
third Eqx (ULS) LinStatic X 0.00333 0.01332
0.01072
third Eqx (ULS) LinStatic X 0.002682 8
0.00980
third Eqy (ULS) LinStatic Y 0.002452 8
0.00950
third Eqy (ULS) LinStatic Y 0.002376 4
third Eqy (ULS) LinStatic Y 0.00266 0.01064
second Eqx (ULS) LinStatic X 0.00455 0.0182
0.02047
second Eqx (ULS) LinStatic X 0.005118 2
0.01755
second Eqx (ULS) LinStatic X 0.004388 2
second Eqy (ULS) LinStatic Y 0.00383 0.01532
0.01559
second Eqy (ULS) LinStatic Y 0.003899 6
0.01673
second Eqy (ULS) LinStatic Y 0.004184 6
0.02146
first Eqx (ULS) LinStatic X 0.005367 8
first Eqx (ULS) LinStatic X 0.00608 0.02432
first Eqx (ULS) LinStatic X 0.005385 0.02154
0.01846
first Eqy (ULS) LinStatic Y 0.004616 4
0.01910
first Eqy (ULS) LinStatic Y 0.004777 8
first Eqy (ULS) LinStatic Y 0.005055 0.02022
groun 0.01501
d Eqx (ULS) LinStatic X 0.003753 2
groun 0.01709
d Eqx (ULS) LinStatic X 0.004274 6
23 | P a g e
groun
d Eqx (ULS) LinStatic X 0.003825 0.0153
groun 0.01340
d Eqy (ULS) LinStatic Y 0.003351 4
groun 0.01399
groun 0.01467
IN X-direction
Design horizontal inter-storey deflection=Δex*Rµ=0.0243˂0.025 OK
IN Y-direction
Design horizontal inter-storey deflection=Δey*Rµ=0.0202˂0.025 OK
Table 4-7: Storey Drift at serviceability limit state
TABLE: Story Drifts

Direc-
Story Output Case Case Type tion Drift
0.00155
top Eqy (SLS) LinStatic Y 4
0.00154
0.00164
0.00168
top Eqx (SLS) LinStatic X 9
0.00181
0.00168
0.00235
third Eqy (SLS) LinStatic Y 9
0.00228
0.00255
0.00289
third Eqx (SLS) LinStatic X 1
0.00320
0.00257
second Eqy (SLS) LinStatic Y 0.00368
24 | P a g e
4
second Eqy (SLS) LinStatic Y 0.00375
0.00402
second Eqy (SLS) LinStatic Y 4
0.00437
second Eqx (SLS) LinStatic X 6
0.00492
0.00422
first Eqy (SLS) LinStatic Y 0.00444
0.00459
first Eqy (SLS) LinStatic Y 4
0.00486
first Eqy (SLS) LinStatic Y 2
0.00516
first Eqx (SLS) LinStatic X 2
0.00584
0.00517
groun 0.00322
d Eqy (SLS) LinStatic Y 3
groun 0.00336
groun 0.00352
groun
d Eqx (SLS) LinStatic X 0.00361
groun 0.00411
d Eqx (SLS) LinStatic X 1
groun 0.00367
d Eqx (SLS) LinStatic X 9
IN X-direction
Design horizontal inter-storey deflection=Δex=0.00585˂0.006 OK
IN Y-direction
Design horizontal inter-storey deflection=Δey=0.00486˂0.006 OK
25 | P a g e
4.1 STOREY DISPLACEMENT & DRIFT
Storey Displacement for ULS along X as Storey Displacement for SLS along X as
obtained from ETABS V19.1.0 obtained from ETABS V19.1.0
Storey Displacement for ULS along Y as Storey Displacement for SLS along Y as
26 | P a g e
Storey Drift for ULS along X as Storey Drift for SLS along X as
Storey Drift for ULS along Y as Storey Drift for SLS along Y as
27 | P a g e
4.2 ANALYSIS OF FORCES AND MOMENTS IN FRAMES

The moments and shear forces of the buildings were analyzed using the ETABS V19.1.0. The analysis is used for identifi -
cation of critical sections and to find out the design requirements so as to design various structural components. The sam -
ple moment diagrams and shear force diagram samples of the sections around these critical components, as extracted from
ETABS V19.1.0 are as follows:
Figure 4-6: Sample Bending Moment Diagram

Load Combination: NBC EnvelopeUnit; KNm
Figure 4-7: Sample Shear Force Diagram

Load Combination: NBC Envelope Unit; KN
28 | P a g e
Figure 4-8: Sample Axial Force Diagram

Load Combination: NBC Envelope Unit; KNm
Figure 4-9: Sample Torsion Diagram

Load Combination: NBC Envelope Unit; KNm
4.3 DESIGN
Design Method Followed: Limit State Method
29 | P a g e
Concrete Grade: M20for Column, Main Beam,Secondery beam and Slab, Fck= 20Mpa
M20 forFoundation and other member, Fck= 20Mpa
Reinforcement Grade: Fe500; Fy = 500 Mpa for all longitudinal, transverse and Shear reinforcements
Design Codes Followed
 IS 456:2000 :Code of Practice for Design of Reinforced Concrete Structures

 IS 13920:2016: Code of Practice for Ductile detailing of RCC Structures Under Seismic Loads
 NBC 105:2020 : Code of Practice for Earthquake Resistant Design of Structures
Beams and columns have been designed using ETABS V19.1.0while slab, staircase and foundations are
designed manually. Samples of manual design calculation of critical beam, column slab and footings are
shown in this report in Annex-II: Sample Design Calculations. The structural design of sections and
reinforcements are presented in the drawing.
4.4 DESIGN SUMMARY
Table 4-8: Column Design Summary

Type GRID Floor Longitudinal Reinforcement Transverse Reinforcement
4-legged 8dia@150
C3,E5,F6 ALL FLOORS 4-25dia+4-20 dia
&100mm c/c
C1(350X350
)
4-legged 8dia@150
A1,B2,D4,E1,E2,E3 ALL FLOORS 4-20dia+4-20 dia
&100mm c/c
C2(350X350
) F1,F2,F3
Table 4-2: Beam Design Summary

End Mid
Beam Type Size
Top Bottom Top Bottom
(230X350 (2-Ф16)+3-Ф12 EX. (3-Ф16) (2-Ф16) (3-Ф16)
Floor Beam
) Provide 2-legged 8Ф stirrups @ 100 & 150 mm c/c
(3-Ф12) (3-Ф12) (3-Ф12) (3-Ф12)
SB & Tie- (230X300
beam ) Provide 2-legged 8Ф stirrups @ 100mm &150mm c/c
Staircase Design Summary

Waist Slab Thickness: 150mm Overall, Clear cover: 20mm
Longitudinal reinforcement:
 12 mm bars@ 125mm c/c for both flights
Transverse Reinforcement: 10 mm bars @ 150mm c/c for all flights
30 | P a g e
Note:- Provide at least 75mm gap between landing slab and column to avoid short column effect.
Slab Design Summary

Thickness of Slab: 127 mm
Reinforcement provide 8mm@ 150mm c/c both ways with layouts and detailing as per IS456:2000 and
SP34. For more details refer structural drawings.
Foundation Design Summary

Foundation Type:Raft Foundation. ,Safe Soil Bearing Capacity Considered =110 KN/m2:
REINFORCEMENT
GRID THICKNESS REINFORCEMENT (TOP)
FOUNDA- Size (BOTTOM)
TION TYPE (M.) MID EDGE(MM X-DIREC- Y-DIREC- X-DIREC- Y-DIREC-
(MM) ) TION TION TION TION
74.46 12MM 12MM 12MM 12MM
RAFT ALL 610 610
m2 @100 C/C @100 C/C @100 C/C @100 C/C
5 CONCLUSION
After the analysis of the building components, the building is found to be safe against the gravity as well
as Seismic Loads. The section sizes and reinforcements are sufficient enough to withstand all kinds of
possible axial, shear, flexural and torsional forces. The design is good enough to assure them Life Safety
level of performance under the Design Basis Earthquake considered for Lalitpur Area, Importance Fac-
tor 1 and soil condition as per NBC 105:202. Bearing capacity of the soil is assumed to be 110
KN/m2,.M20 grade of concrete is used for columns, Beams, slabs& M20 for bend, Staircase and founda-
tions. Ductile detailing as per NBC 105:2020has been extensively adopted while detailing.
6 RECOMMENDATIONS
Design and construction of the structure are inter–related jobs. A performance of a building depends
upon a work and material quality during the construction more than the intensions pursued during struc-
tural design. A large percentage of structural failures are attributed due to poor quality of construction.
Therefore, to assure the proper safety, material and work quality should be maintained during the con-
struction. Structural designer will be responsible for all the structural designs but not for any faulty
constructions happened at site beyond his supervision. Following recommendations are made by the
structural designer.
1. It is recommended to strictly follow the section sizes and reinforcements provided in the structural
drawings.
2. It is recommended that the site engineer should be responsible to handle the problems that may arise
during construction. He/she shall also be responsible for maintaining the material and process quality
during construction.
31 | P a g e
3. It is strictly recommended that any changes in the design shall be done only with the consultation of
the structural designer.
4. It is strictly recommended to maintain the standards in the grade of cement and reinforcement steel.
ANNEXES
ANNEX -I: REFERENCES
IS: 456 – 2000 Code of Practice for Plain and Reinforced Concrete
IS: 875 (Parts 1-5) Code of practice for design loads (other than earthquake) for buildings and
structures (second revision)
Part 1 – Dead loads
Part 2 – Imposed loads
NBC 105: 2020 Seismic Design of Buildings in Nepal
NBC 105: 2020 Criteria for Earthquake Resistant Design of Structures
NBC 105:2020 Ductile Detailing of Reinforced Concrete Structures subjected to Seismic

forces - Code of Practice
SP: 16 – 1980 Design Aids for Reinforced Concrete to IS: 456 – 1978
SP: 34 – 1987 Handbook on Concrete Reinforcement Detailing

Jain, A.K. Reinforced Concrete, Limit State Design, fifth edition, Nem Chand and Bros,
Rookie, 1999
Sinha, S. N. Reinforced Concrete Design, Second edition, Tata McGraw Hill Publishing
Company Ltd, New Delhi, 1996
Pillai,U.C. Reinforced Concrete Design, Second edition, Tata McGraw Hill Publishing
&Menon,D. Company Ltd, New Delhi, 2003
Dr. Adnan, Advanced Foundation Engineering Design Equations for Strap Footings
A. Basma
32 | P a g e
ANNEX-II: SAMPLE DESIGN CALCULATIONS
BEAM DESIGN
ETABS Concrete Frame Design
IS 456:2000 + IS 13920:2016 Beam Section Design
Beam Element Details Type: Ductile Frame (Summary)

Level Element Unique Name Section ID Combo ID Station Loc Length (mm) LLRF
ground B5 2 MB(230X430) DL+0.3LL+(Eqx(ULS)+0.30Eqy(ULS)) 3854.8 4029.8 1
Section Properties
b (mm) h (mm) bf (mm) ds (mm) dct (mm) dcb (mm)
230 430 230 0 41 41
Material Properties
Ec (MPa) fck (MPa) Lt.Wt Factor (Unitless) fy (MPa) fys (MPa)
22360.68 20 1 500 500
Design Code Parameters

ɣC ɣS
1.5 1.15
Factored Forces and Moments

Factored Factored Factored Factored
Mu3 Tu Vu2 Pu
kN-m kN-m kN kN
-85.4329 8.1728 70.1635 0.4939
Design Moments, Mu3& Mt

Factored Factored Positive Negative
Moment Mt Moment Moment
kN-m kN-m kN-m kN-m
-85.4329 13.7954 0 -99.2284
Design Moment and Flexural Reinforcement for Moment, Mu3& Tu

Design Design -Moment +Moment Minimum Required
-Moment +Moment Rebar Rebar Rebar Rebar
kN-m kN-m mm² mm² mm² mm²
Top (+2 Axis) -99.2284 672 0 672 192
Bottom (-2 Axis) 0 336 0 0 336
Shear Force and Reinforcement for Shear, Vu2& Tu
33 | P a g e
Shear Ve Shear Vc Shear Vs Shear Vp Rebar Asv /s

kN kN kN kN mm²/m
86.3847 0 143.2386 58.844 1020.38
Torsion Force and Torsion Reinforcement for Torsion, Tu& VU2

Tu Vu Core b1 Core d1 Rebar Asvt /s
kN-m kN mm mm mm²/m
8.1728 70.1635 168 368 577.66
COLUMN DESIGN
ETABS Concrete Frame Design
IS 456:2000 + IS 13920:2016 Column Section Design
Column Element Details Type: Ductile Frame (Summary)

Level Element Unique Name Section ID Combo ID Station Loc Length (mm) LLRF
first C15 125 COL (350X350) DL+0.3LL-(Eqx(ULS)+0.30Eqy(ULS) 0 2896 1
Section Properties
b (mm) h (mm) dc (mm) Cover (Torsion) (mm)
350 350 58 30
Material Properties
Ec (MPa) fck (MPa) Lt.Wt Factor (Unitless) fy (MPa) fys (MPa)
22360.68 20 1 500 500
Design Code Parameters

ɣC ɣS
1.5 1.15
Axial Force and Biaxial Moment Design For Pu , Mu2 , Mu3

Design Pu Design Mu2 Design Mu3 Minimum M2 Minimum M3 Rebar Area Rebar %
kN kN-m kN-m kN-m kN-m mm² %
344.4532 -102.6896 -60.5266 6.8891 6.8891 2718 2.22
Axial Force and Biaxial Moment Factors

K Factor Length Initial Moment Additional Moment Minimum Moment
Unitless mm kN-m kN-m kN-m
Major Bend(M3) 1 2466 -24.2106 0 6.8891
Minor Bend(M2) 1 2466 -19.057 0 6.8891
Shear Design for Vu2 , Vu3
34 | P a g e
Shear Vu Shear Vc Shear Vs Shear Vp Rebar Asv /s

kN kN kN kN mm²/m
Major, Vu2 50.9836 99.6685 40.8795 50.9836 387.95
Minor, Vu3 69.2805 99.6685 40.8795 69.2805 387.95
Joint Shear Check/Design

Joint Shear Shear Shear Shear Joint Shear
Force VTop Vu,Tot Vc Area Ratio
kN kN kN kN cm² Unitless
Major Shear, Vu2 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
Minor Shear, Vu3 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
(1.4) Beam/Column Capacity Ratio

Major Ratio Minor Ratio
N/A N/A
Additional Moment Reduction Factor k (IS 39.7.1.1)

Ag Asc Puz Pb Pu k
cm² cm² kN kN kN Unitless
1225 27.2 2121.6651 448.0509 344.4532 1
Additional Moment (IS 39.7.1)

Consider Length Section KL/Depth KL/Depth KL/Depth Ma
Ma Factor Depth (mm) Ratio Limit Exceeded Moment (kN-m)
Major Bending (M3 ) Yes 0.852 350 7.046 12 No 0
Minor Bending (M2 ) Yes 0.852 350 7.046 12 No 0
Notes:
N/A: Not Applicable
N/C: Not Calculated
N/N: Not Needed
SLAB DESIGN
Design of Slab
Slab Type: Two Adjacent EdgesDiscontinous
fck = 20.000 N/mm2
fy= 500.000 N/mm2
Clear size of Slab width 3.854 m

length 4.026 m
For the critical sectoin of the slab

effective spans will be
lx = 3.854 m
ly = 4.026 m
ly/lx = 1.045
Assume over all depth of 127.000 mm

effective depth = 107.000 mm
From Table 26 IS456:2000
Negative short span coefficient (αx)'= 0.047
35 | P a g e
positive short span coefficient (αx)= 0.035
Negative long span coefficient (αy)' = 0.047

positive long span coefficient (αy) = 0.035
Dead load of slab= 3.175 kN/m2

live load = 2.000 kN/m2
partition wall= 1.000 kN/m2
finish load with ceiling plaster = 1.300 kN/m2
total load = 7.475 kN/m2

Factored total load W = 11.213 kN/m2
Negative moments
Mx = = 7.828 KNm/m
My = = 7.828 KNm/m
positive moments
Mx' = = 5.829 KNm/m
My' = = 5.829 KNm/m
54.246 mm
Effective depth of slab (d)=
adopt effective depth of 107.000 mm
over all depth = 127.000 mm
short edge
middle strips = 2.891 m
edge strips = 0.482 m
long edge
middle strips = 3.020 m
edge strips= = 0.503 m
Positive Reinforcement
Area of steel along short span
Reinforcement in middle strips=
BM=
where ,
Bm = 5.829 KNm/m
fy = 500.000
d= 107.000 mm
fck = 20.000 N/mm2
b= 1.000 m
36 | P a g e
by solving Ast = 129.120 mm2/m

minimum reinforcement Ast= 152.400 mm2/m
Design Ast= 152.400 mm2/m
Provided Reinforcement bar size 8.000 mm bars

Required spacing 329.869 mmc/c
Provided Spacing 150.000 mm c/c
pt= 0.264 %
provided Ast= 335.147 mm2
Reinforcement in Edge Strips
Minimum Ast= 152.400 mm2/m
required spacing= 329.869 mmc/c
Provided Reinforcement bar size 8.000 mm bars
Provided Spacing 150.000 mm c/c
(pt= 0.264 %
Area of steel along long span

BM=
where ,
Bm = 5.829 kNm
fy = 500.000
d= 107.000 mm
fck = 20.000 N/mm2
b= 1.000 m

design Ast= 152.400 mm2/m
spacing= 329.869 mmc/c
Use 8.000 mm bars
spacing= 150.000 mm c/c
pt= 0.264 %
Reinforcement in edge strips

Minimum Ast= 152.400 mm2
use 8.000 mm bars
at spacing of 150.000 mm c/c
pt= 0.264 %
37 | P a g e
Negative Reinforcement
Area of Steel along short span
BM=
where ,
Bm = 7.828 kNm
fy = 500.000
d= 107.000 mm
fck = 20.000 N/mm2
b= 1.000 m

Use 8.000 mm bars
(pt= 0.264 %

use 8.000 mm bars

(pt= 0.264 %)
335.147 mm2
Area of steel along long span

BM=
where ,
Bm = 7.828 kNm
fy = 500.000
d= 107.000 mm
fck = 20.000 N/mm2
b= 1.000 m
38 | P a g e

Spacing required= 515.420
Use 8.000 mm bars
(pt= 0.264 %)
provided Ast= 335.147 mm2/m

use 8.000 mm
(pt= 0.264 %)
335.147 mm2/m
Corner reinforcement
Ast= 114.300 mm2/m
Use 8.000 mm
(pt= 0.264 %)
335.140 mm2/m
Check for deflection
max area of steel required Ast= 175.360 mm2/m

max area of steel provided = 335.147 mm2/m
fs= 151.738 N/mm2
% of maximum tension steel = 0.264 %

modification factor from graph IS 456
2.000
2000=
Basic L/d ratio (with deformed bars) = 40*0.8 = 23.000
Maximum allowed L/d ratio with modifica-

46.000
tion =
designed lx/d = 36.019
Thus safe in deflection
RAFT FOUNDATION DESIGN

Raft Foundation is modeled in SAFE as follows;
The mat is modeled as a thick plate. The position of columns are located and loads from superstructure
are applied to it.
Soil Bearing Capacity (SBC), for mat foundation (Assumed) = 110 KN/m3
39 | P a g e
The modulus of subgrade is computed using Bowles equation as follows

Modulus of Subgrade = 40xSBCxSafety Factor= 40x110x2.5 = 11000KN/m3.
Concrete Grade = M20 (fck= 20Mpa) for mat and Piles
Reinforcement Steel Grade = Fe500 (fy = 500 Mpa)
Mat foundation as modeled in SAFE
40 | P a g e
Loads from Superstructure
Dead Loads Axial Force from Columns in KN
Live Load from Columns in KN
41 | P a g e
Analysis
Fig: Vertical Settlement under Service loads (DL+LL) in mm
Note: Maximum vertical Settlement noted is 10.54mm
Fig: Soil Reaction under Service Loads (DL+LL) in KN/m2
Note: Maximum soil pressure noted is 107.30 KN/m2
42 | P a g e
Fig: Punching Shear
Reinforcement
REINFORCEMENT
GRID THICKNESS REINFORCEMENT (TOP)
FOUNDA- Size (BOTTOM)
TION TYPE (M.) MID EDGE(MM X-DIREC- Y-DIREC- X-DIREC- Y-DIREC-
(MM) ) TION TION TION TION
74.46 12MM 12MM 12MM 12MM
RAFT ALL 610 610
m2 @100 C/C @100 C/C @100 C/C @100 C/C
43 | P a g e
44 | P a g e

Mr. Dinesh Shrestha (Structural Report)

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Mr. Dinesh Shrestha (Structural Report)

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

A REPORT ON

STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS & DESIGN OF

2 DESCRIPTION OF THE BUILDING.................................................................................................................. 3

Figure 3-1: Typical Floor Plan of the building................................................................................................................3

1.1 AN OVERVIEW OF EARTHQUAKE-RESISTANT DESIGN

1.2 EARTHQUAKE RESISTANT DESIGN PHILOSOPHY

The earthquake design philosophy may be summarized as follows:

2 DESCRIPTION OF THE BUILDING

2.1 BUILDING DESCRIPTION

Figure 2-1: Typical Floor Plan of the building

Figure 2-2 Sectional Elevation of the Building

Table 2-1: Building Description

Figure 3-3: Three Dimensional view of Model created in ETABS V19.1.0

Figure 3-5: Typical Elevation as viewed in a Model created in ETABS V19.1.0

7. Earthquake load in +veX-direction (EQX_SLS)

4.2 LOAD COMBINATION

1. NBC 101: 1.2DL+1.5LL

Where, DL = Dead Load

4.3 DEAD LOADS

Floor Finishing (Screeding & punning) 23.00 KN/m³

Table 4-3: Wall loads Applied to the Frames

Stor Bea Net Adopt

4.4 LIVE LOADS

4.5 SEISMIC LOADS (EARTHQUAKE LOADS)

4.5.1 EQUIVALENT STATIC METHOD

HORIZONTAL SEISMIC BASE SHEAR

VERTICAL DISTRIBUTION OF SEISMIC FORCES

 for structure having time period T≤0.5sec, k=1

 for structure having time period T≥2.5sec, k=2

4.5.2 DYNAMIC ANALYSIS

TABLE: Load Pattern Definitions - Auto Seismic - User Coefficient

0.12 1.09 558.932

TABLE: Modal Participating Mass Ratios

4.6 ANALYSIS &DESIGN PARAMETERS

Sum of seismic weight= 4435.972 KN Ductility factor (R)= 4

For ulimate limit State

Note: while calcultaingthe lateral seismic force

k= an exponent related to the structural period as follows:

Storey W (KN) H (m) W*Hk F(KN) Di(m) Wd2 Fd

Sum= 3338.380 3760.6 4.577 21.973

T= 0.916 From Rayleigh

Figure 4-1Spectral Shape Factor, Ch(T) for Equivalent Static Method

Spectral shape factor for new time periodCh(T)= 2.25

For Serviceablility limit State

Note: while calcultaingthe lateral seismic force

k= an exponent related to the structural period as follows:

Storey W (KN) H (m) W*Hk F(KN) Di(m) Wd2 Fd

second 1114.912 2.896 3228.8 186.6656 0.0356 1.412 6.642

Sum= 3338.380 9667.9 4.235 19.331

T= 0.939 From Rayleigh

Figure 4-1Spectral Shape Factor, Ch(T) for Equivalent Static Method

Spectral shape factor for new time periodCh(T)= 2.25

Sum of seismic weight= 4435.972 KN Ductility factor (R)= 4

For ulimate limit State

Note: while calcultaingthe lateral seismic force

k= an exponent related to the structural period as follows:

Storey W (KN) H (m) W*Hk F(KN) Di(m) Wd2 Fd

Sum= 3338.380 9667.95 3.64 18.72

T= 0.885 From Rayleigh

Figure 4-1Spectral Shape Factor, Ch(T) for Equivalent Static Method

Spectral shape factor for new time periodCh(T)= 2.25

For Serviceablility limit State