Ce015 Cec32s4 Tanguin DP

Major Design Experience Information
CE 015 (Principles of Reinforce Concrete Design)

2nd Semester, SY 2022-2023
Student Tanguin, Lennard Allen T.

DESIGN OF FOUR (4) STOREY APARTMENT BUILDING AT MEXICO
Project Title PAMPANGA
Program Concentration Area Construction Engineering (Structural Steel Design)
Constraints
Quantitative Constraint
Financial limitations and money allocation are the basis of economic constraints. To
make it simple, economic constraints are primarily related to money. Projects without
sufficient budgets would not be able to successfully accomplish the suggested goals
and objectives for productivity and quality standards. The success of the project
in terms of quality, safety, functionality, and performance may suffer if the budget
Economic Constraints is insufficient or allocated incorrectly. As a result, the project's progress determines
how much money will be allocated within the budget. The client insisted that the
costs must not go above the allotted budget for the project, therefore the designers
came up with a range of designs that would satisfy the client and examined them to
find the most effective design that would fit within the client's budget.
Considering different factors affecting the final design of the project, the life span of
each moment resisting frame system incorporated in the apartment building will
determine if the project is sustainable or not. The designer’s final design
Sustainability Constraints recommendation will be chosen by the client because of the satisfaction from the
longer life span of the building. Correspondingly, the longer the life span, the
favorable it is for the designer and for the client.
All aspects of a project are influenced by constructability, especially those that have
to do with engineering and architecture. Constructability constraints are the
Constructability Constraints restrictions and difficulties encountered during the construction process. As projects
become more complicated, the problem of constructability becomes important. It can
limit design options to those that can be effectively and efficiently built given the
resources, budget, and timeline that are already available. Before a project is built,
constructability constraints should be identified to reduce or prevent error, and delays.
Qualitative Constraints
Environmental constraints refer to the factors that are beyond our control or are
difficult to change. These constraints are influenced by the location where a
structure is proposed to be built. They include the availability of natural resources
Environmental Constraints which can impact the project's progress, as well as the pollution produced during
construction. It is important to consider the environmental impact when designing a
structure, and choose the most sustainable and eco-friendly design to ensure
successful project completion.
Social constraints refers to the societies cultural background, heritage, health, and
welfare. Understanding the people, their background, community laws, regulations,
Social Constraints needs to be considered to what kinds of building, development, and economic activity
can take place. The building is designed to be beneficial to the people in the
community.
Tradeoffs (Columns)
The design of axially loaded circular columns depends on their cross-sectional shape
and material properties. This is because the entire cross-sectional area of the column
is compressed and the weight acts at the center of the column. However, in reality,
Column Trade-Off 1:
Circular columns are rarely perfectly vertical, which makes it difficult to achieve complete
compression. This results in loads being eccentric with respect to the center of
the column.
Rectangular/Square reinforced concrete sections are widely used in construction. It

is commonly employed due to rectangular or square columns are simpler to build and
Column Trade-Off 2:
Rectangular cast. Rectangular/Square sections are simpler to shutter and support against
collapse under pressure while the concrete is still in a flowable form.
Tradeoffs (Beams and Girders)

Reinforced concrete beams are utilized as structural elements that can support
transverse external loads. These loads create torsion, shear forces, and bending
moments along the length of the beams. Concrete has low tensile strength but high
compressive strength. To compensate, steel reinforcement is used to absorb tensile
stresses in reinforced concrete beams. Beams also bear the weight of other
Beams and Girders Trade-Off 1:
components such as walls, columns, and slabs, transferring the loads to supporting
Rectangular
columns. Beams can be cantilevered, continuous, or simply supported and can
be created in various shapes such as L-shaped, T-shaped, rectangular, or
square. Double- or single-reinforced beams are used depending on the depth of
the beam.
Tradeoffs (Slabs)
A one-way slab is a type of concrete slab that transmits loads to the supporting beams
and columns in a single direction, resulting in bending occurring only in one direction.
These slabs have a simple design and are easy to construct. One-way slabs are
a type of concrete slab that are reinforced to span between two supports in a
single direction. They are commonly used in buildings with a rectangular floor plan,
Slab Trade-Off 1:
One Way Slab where the slab is supported by parallel walls or beams. To withstand the applied
loads, reinforcement is placed in the bottom of the slab where tensile stresses are
highest. One-way slabs are a popular and straightforward option for construction
and are utilized in a variety of buildings, including residential and commercial
structures like apartments, offices, and parking garages.
A two-way slab carries the load on the slab in two directions, perpendicular to each
other, with the help of both primary and secondary reinforcement. The primary
reinforcement is designed to resist the bending moment caused by the load and
Slab Trade-Off 1=:
is provided in both directions. The secondary reinforcement, usually mild steel
Two Way Slab
bars, provides reinforcement against shear forces and helps to control cracking.
Tradeoffs (Framing System)

Moment resisting frames are commonly utilized in both steel and concrete
construction. A Special Moment Resisting Frame (SMRF) is a structural system used
in construction that is specifically engineered to withstand lateral forces such as those
arising from earthquakes or strong winds. The connection between the beams and
columns is rigid, preventing any rotation between them. Special moment
Framing System Trade-Off 3: resisting frames (SMRF) are designed to endure significant inelastic deformations
Special Moment Resisting and allow for controlled motions during an earthquake. The connections between
Frame the beams and columns are essential to the system's functionality, providing both
rigidity and flexibility. According to the National Structural Code of the Philippines
(NSCP), SMRF is a moment-resisting steel frame that can withstand lateral pressures
without relying on the structure's walls for support in the direction where the
framework is weak. SMRFs are necessary for structures located in seismically
active regions or those considered high-risk structures.
Standards
ASEP acknowledges the desired latest structural code dealing with the design and
installation of structural systems through requirements that highlight to the
National Structural Code accomplishment. The new National Structural Code of the Philippines (NSCP Volume
of the Philippines
I) is formulated to meet these needs through different model codes/restrictions,
(NSCP 2015)
generally from the United States, for the protection of the public health and safety
nationwide.
The American Institute of Steel Construction (AISC) is a non-profit organization that

provides technical assistance, research, education, and advocacy for the structural
steel industry in the United States of America. AISC serves as a tool for Engineers,
American Institute of Steel Architects, and other professionals for steel dimensions and properties that can be
Construction (AISC) used in designing a structure. AISC advocates for the use of steel as a substitute in
other construction material, since it offers safety, sustainability, and cost-effective in
terms of building material applications, this code provisions specifically provides
guidelines that can help professionals to design and fabricate steel materials for
construction applications.
The National Building Code of The National Building Code of the Philippines, which was also called as the
the Philippines (NBCP) Presidential Decree No.1096, was created to embody the modern methodology on
construction, maintenance and building design.The code issues the framework for
the minimum standards and requirements.
Modern Tools/Techniques
Designers have used this tool to create the Building Plans of the proposed structure
AutoCAD
in 2D Model.
Designers have used this tool to visualize and create the 3D Model of the proposed
SketchUp
structure.
Designers have used this tool to accurately gather data calculations that is needed in
Microsoft Excel
the design parameters of the proposed structure.
Designers have used this tool to perform Structural Analysis that conforms with the
STAAD
provisions of the National Structural Code of the Philippines (NSCP 2015).
TECHNOLOGICAL INSTITUTE OF THE PHILIPPINES
938 Aurora Blvd., Cubao, Quezon City
CE 015 (Principles of Reinforce Concrete Design)
DESIGN OF A FOUR (4) STOREY APARTMENT BUILDING AT JOSE ABAD SANTOS AVENUE,
MEXICO, PAMPANGA
Submitted by:
Tanguin, Lennard Allen T.
2010239
ACADEMIC INTEGRITY PLEDGE

I swear on my honor that I did not use any inappropriate aid, nor give such to others, in accomplishing this
coursework. I understand that cheating and/or plagiarism is a major offense, as stated in TIP Memorandum
No. P-04, s. 2017-2018, and that I will be sanctioned appropriately once I have committed such acts.
Tanguin, Lennard Allen T.

2010239
Table of Contents
Chapter 1:
1.1 Background........................................................................................................1
1.2 Project Location....................................................................................................2
1.3 Project Client....................................................................................................... 2
1.4 Project Objectives................................................................................................3
1.4.1 General Objectives...............................................................................................3
1.4.2 Specific Objectives...............................................................................................3
1.5 Scope and Limitations............................................................................................3
1.6 Project Development............................................................................................ 4
Chapter 2:
2.1 Location Data......................................................................................................7
2.1.1 Vicinity.............................................................................................................. 7
2.1.2 Topography........................................................................................................10
2.2 Hazards............................................................................................................. 10
2.2.1 Flood Hazard Map................................................................................................. 11
2.2.2 Earthquake Hazard Map..........................................................................................11
2.2.3 Liquefaction Hazard Map..........................................................................................12
2.3 Geotechnical Report.............................................................................................. 12
2.4 Description of the Structure.......................................................................................13
2.5 Building Plans…................................................................................................................14
2.6................................................................................................................ Design Loads 26
2.6.1............................................................................................................... Dead Loads 26
2.6.2...............................................................................................................Live Loads… 27
2.6.3................................................................................................................Wind Loads 27
2.6.4......................................................................................................Earthquake Loads… 28
2.6.5...............................................................................................................Other Loads 29
2.7.............................................................................................Review of Related Literature… 30
Chapter 3:
3.1......................................................................................................... Design Constraints 34
3.1.1.................................................................................................Quantitative Constraints 34
3.1.1.1................................................................................................Economic Constraints 34
3.1.1.2.........................................................................................Constructability Constraints 34
3.1.1.3........................................................................................... Sustainability Constraints 35
3.1.2..................................................................................................Qualitative Constraints 35
3.1.2.1.............................................................................................Architectural Constraints 35
3.1.2.2.....................................................................................................Social Constraints 35
3.2..................................................................................................................... Trade Offs 35
3.2.1 Frames
3.2.1.1................................................................................... Special Moment Resisting Frame 36
Columns
3.2.2.1...............................................................................................................Rectangular 37
3.2.2.2..................................................................................................................... Circular38
3.2.3 Beams and Girders
3.2.3.1...............................................................................................................Rectangular 39
3.2.4................................................................................................................. One way Slab40
3.2.4.2............................................................................................................. Two Way Slab41
3.2.3............................................................................................................Isolated Footings 41
3.3...............................................................Multiple Constraints Using Initial Normalization Method 42
3.4 Design Codes
3.4.1...........................................................................National Structural Code of the Philippines 44
3.4.2............................................................................National Building Code of The Phillippines 45
3.4.3................................................................................American Institute of Steel Construction 45
Chapter 4:
4.1......................................................................................................General Design Process 48
4.2...........................................................................................Methodologies For Design Loads 49
4.2.1................................................................................................................ Gravity Loads 49
4.2.2................................................................................................................... Wind Loads50
4.2.3............................................................................................................ Seismic Loads 51
4.4............................................................................................Analysis Result for Trade Offs 52
4.4.1......................................................................................................................Section 53
Properties
Chapter 5:
5.1.....................................................................................................Final Model of Structure 54
5.2.......................................................................................................... Final Design Report 55
List of Figures
Figure 1.1 Perspective View....................................................................................................1
Figure 1.2. Project Location (Satellite View)................................................................................2
Figure 1.3. Kinaiya Design Studios Logo....................................................................................2
Figure 1.4. Project Development.............................................................................................. 5
Figure 2.1 Vicinity Map.......................................................................................................... 7
Figure 2.2 Population Growth of Mexico Pampanga (1903 to 2020)..................................................7
Figure 2.2 Age Group of Mexico Pampanga (2015)......................................................................8
Figure 2.3 Socio-Economic Data of Mexico Pampanga (2009 to 2016).............................................9
Figure 2.4a. Topography (Source: contourmapgenerator.com).........................................................10
Figure 2.4b. Topography (Source: en-ph.topographic-map.com).....................................................10
Figure 2.5. Food Hazard Map..................................................................................................11
Figure 2.6. Earthquake Hazard Map..........................................................................................11
Figure 2.7. Liquefaction Hazard Map........................................................................................12
Figure 2.8. Geotechnical report of Project Location.......................................................................12
Figure 3.1 SMRF.................................................................................................................. 36
Figure 3.2 Rectangular Column................................................................................................37
Figure 3.3 Circular Columns..................................................................................................38
Figure 3.4 Rectangular Beams…........................................................................................................39
Figure 3.5 One Way Slab.................................................................................................................40
Figure 3.6 Two Way Slab..................................................................................................................40
Figure 3.7 Isolated Footing................................................................................................................41
Figure 4.1 General Design Process..........................................................................................48

Figure 4.2 Gravity Loads Design Process..................................................................................49
Figure 4.3 Gravity Loads of Tradeoff 1......................................................................................49
Figure 4.6 Transfer of Wind Loads of 1st Tradeoff..............................................................................50
Figure 4.7 Transfer of Wind Loads of 2nd Tradeoff..............................................................................51
Figure 4.8 Transfer of Wind Loads of 3rd Tradeoff...............................................................................51
Figure 4.9 Transfer of Seismic Loads 1st Tradeoff...............................................................................51
Figue 4.12 1st Tradeoff Section Properties..........................................................................................52
Figure 4.13 2nd Tradeoff Section Properties….......................................................................................52
Figure 4.14 3rd Tradeoff Section Properties…........................................................................................53
Figure 5.1 Structure of Winning Combination........................................................................................54
Figure 5.2 Support reaction Summary of Winning Section..............................................................54
Figure 5.3 Final Design Report................................................................................................55

List of Tables
Table 2.1 Description of Structure.........................................................................................13
Table 2.2 Dead Loads...................................................................................................................26
Table 2.3 Live Loads.....................................................................................................................27
Table 2.4 Wind Loads...................................................................................................................27
Table 2.5 Concrete Compressive Strength......................................................................................29
Table 2.6 Reinforcing Steel Bars....................................................................................................30
Table 2.7 Masonry Unit Compressive Strength................................................................................30
Table 3.1 Overview of Trade Offs...................................................................................................36
Table 3.3 Advantage and Disadvantage of Rectangular Column..................................................37
Table 3.4 Advantage and Disadvantage Circular Column............................................................39
Table 3.5 Advantage and Disadvantage One Way Slab................................................................40
Table 3.6 Advantage and Disadvantage Two way Slab...............................................................41
Table 3.7 Initial Assessment of Tradeoffs..........................................................................................42
Table 3.8 Normalized Data of Tradeoffs............................................................................................43
Table 3.9 Weighted Sum of Tradeoffs................................................................................................44

CHAPTER 1
1.1 Background
The proposed project is a 4-storey apartment located at Jose Abad Santos Ave, Brgy. San Jose
Matulid, Mexico Pampanga. The proposed housing project has a lot of 5000 sqm that can hold 40-plus
families. It is designed for families from informal settling and needing a new home. Relocating them to this
housing project will give them convenience, comfort, job opportunities and safety.
An apartment building is a type of housing that consists of multiple living units known as apartments or flats.
It is designed to house several households within a single structure and is commonly found in cities. It offers
individuals and families a cost-effective and convenient housing option. The importance of prioritizing safe
and secure houses cannot be overstated. Houses with high-performance architecture and technology that
promote comfortability, accessibility and operate effectively during natural and artificial catastrophes are in
high demand.
In the Philippines, about 4.5 people are homeless or informal settlers, and about 3 million in Metro
Manila alone, one of the most in any urban area in the world. The residents of informal settlements often
face socioeconomic challenges, including poverty, limited access to clean water, sanitation facilities,
healthcare, and education. Housing projects play a vital role in providing shelter to people who are unable to
afford their own homes. These projects are usually initiated by the government or private organizations, and
they aim to provide affordable housing solutions to individuals and families. Housing projects also have
economic benefits as they create jobs and stimulate economic growth.
Figure 1.1 Perspective View
1
1.2 Project Location
The location of the project is along Jose Abad Santos Ave, Mexico, Pampanga as shown in Figure 1.2. The
site is besides the Kingdom of Jehovah’s Witnesses, Mexico Pampanga and a block away from National Grid
Corporation of the Philippines (NGCP) Substation Mexico, Pampanga. The proposed project is located at the
coordinates 15°03’20’’ North and 120°43’05’’ East. The main road along the location is Jose Abad Santos
Ave.
Figure 1.2. Project Location (Satellite View)
1.3 Project Client
The design and construction would not be possible without the help of Architect Pat Molina and together with
her company Kinaiya Design Studios. The company is one of the most trusted architectural and construction
companies in the Philippines. Kinaiya is well known for its projects like residential buildings, condominiums,
and other housing projects.
Figure 1.3. Kinaiya Design Studios Logo
2
1.3.1 Client’s Requirement
i. Has a minimum capacity of 40 four member households
ii.Should have at least three floors, one of which is the roof deck
iii.Designed for households relocated from informal settling
iv.Design should be optimized for comfort and accessibility.
1.4 Project Objectives
1.4.1. General Objectives
To design a four (4) storey apartment reinforced concrete building that can withstand the design
loads applied to the structure in accordance with the National Structural Code of the Philippines Vol.
1 Seventh Edition (NSCP 2015).
1.4.2 Specific Objectives
 To provide architectural and structural plans of the project,

 To analyze the structure using Bentley STAAD Pro V8i in accordance with NSCP 2015, Vol 1,7th
Edition.
 To design the most economical and safe structural members in the chosen trade-off (structural
system) based on the raw ranking computations considering the constraints and standards.
 To provide the structural plan with structural details of beams, girders, slabs and columns
1.5 Scope and Limitations
The following are the scopes of the design project:
 Cost estimates for structural elements.

 Structural systems designated as part of the seismic-force-resisting system shall be designed and
detailed in accordance with NSCP 2015 Vol. 1, 7th Edition Section 418. "Earthquake-Resistant
Structures".
 The architectural and structural plans of the project including the structural details.
 The structural analysis of the structure is automated by computer software (STAAD.Pro V8i).
 The building was designed and conceptualized in accordance with the National Building Code of the
3
Philippines and National Structural Code of the Philippines (NSCP 2015) Vol. 1 Seventh Edition.
The following are the limitations of the design project:
 Design of footings were excluded.

 Foundation plan were excluded.
 The sanitary, electrical, mechanical and fire protection plans of the building were excluded.
 Cost estimates for architectural elements are excluded.
 Design of purlins, braces, and struts for roof truss were excluded.
 Design for bolts and weld connections were excluded.
 Design for steel bracings for structural frame system were excluded.
1.6 Project Development
Building construction involves several phases that must be followed to achieve the desired outcomes. As part
of the project development, designers collaborate with clients to establish a set of objectives and
requirements for the planning phase. Afterward, the usage of the building is defined, including the number of
occupants, rooms, and other activities that would take place. This data helps the construction professionals
determine the required area for the building.
The project planning phase follows, which is crucial in defining the project constraints and standards. It also
helps the architects design the building economically and sustainably. The project constraints and standards
give designers an overview of potential project influences such as zoning, environmental impact,
accessibility, and archaeological impact.
The schematic design phase is the next step, which entails final consultation with the client regarding
the design, budget, layout of rooms and spaces, types of materials, framing system, and much more. The
design development phase follows, where the team finalizes the building layout, determines the limits of
column size and beam size, performs preliminary design for the building and the HVAC system, provides a
cost estimate for the project, and meets with the client to present the plan and seek feedback.
In the preliminary stage of structural configuration, the design of the structure is outlined along with the
arrangement of its elements, all in compliance with the National Building Code of the Philippines. The
Estimation of Loads phase identifies the loads that may act on the structure and determines the
materials needed. During Preliminary Member Selection, the appropriate member size is determined
based on previous project experiences. Finally, the proposed structure undergoes Structural Analysis with the
help of the computer software MIDAS, which computes member forces, stresses, and deflections.
During the Evaluation Phase, the structural members are analyzed and evaluated to ensure that they meet
the requirements of the National Structural Code of the Philippines (NSCP 2015). This phase is crucial as it
4
determines whether the proposed structure is safe and up to code, and if it should proceed to construction.
The Identification of Project Trade-offs phase is also conducted during this phase, which involves identifying
any factors or trade-offs that may affect the integrity or strength of the structure. If necessary, redesigning
can occur to ensure that the structure meets safety and serviceability requirements as outlined in the NSCP
2015.
Figure 1.4. Project Development 5

CHAPTER 2
6
2.1 Location Data
2.1.1 Vicinity Map
This figure show the vicinity map of the site location, including the landmarks nearby the project location.
Figure 2.1 Vicinity Map
2.1.2 Demography and Socio-Economic Data
Analyzing the demography and the socio-economic data of an area can play a vital role for before starting
businesses, and building establishments. Demography and socio-economic data may provide a variety of
details about a population, status, and this information can be helpful when establishing a construction
project. This is an important component especially in this proposed project where a four storey apartment
is going to be built, where its serviceability or need is dependent on the population of the area.
2.1.2.1 Population Growth
Figure 2.2 Population Growth of Mexico Pampanga (1903 to 2020) 7

2.1.2.2 Gender and Age Group
Figure 2.2 Age Group of Mexico Pampanga (2015)
8
2.1.2.3 Socio-Economic Data
Figure 2.3 Socio-Economic Data of Mexico Pampanga (2009 to 2016)
9
2.1.3 Topography
A topographic map is characterized by the use of elevation contour lines, which illustrate the shape of the
Earth's surface. In this design project, analyzing the topography of the site is essential. It helps designers
determine whether existing elevations can affect foundation design. The use of topographic maps is
valuable in identifying the most suitable foundation and designing the building, especially in terms of views
and access to surroundings. This figure shows the topography of the site, with contour lines representing
different elevations.
Figure 2.4a. Topography (Source: contourmapgenerator.com)
Figure 2.4b. Topography (Source: en-ph.topographic-map.com)
10
2.2 Hazards
2.2.1 Flood Hazard Map
The flood hazard map plays a crucial role in ensuring safety, disaster preparedness, and risk management.
Its primary purpose is to identify flood-prone areas. The designer considered incorporating a flood hazard
map in the proposed building to enhance its safety measures during disasters and calamities. As a public
apartment, the building is an essential structure, and the flood hazard map can be a valuable tool in
minimizing damages caused by floods.
Figure 2.5. Food Hazard Map

(Source: University of the Philippines Nationwide Operational Assessment of Hazard, UP-NOAH)
2.2.2 Earthquake Hazard Map
The importance of an earthquake hazards map lies in its ability to assess and communicate the potential
risks and vulnerabilities associated with earthquakes in a given area.
Figure 2.6. Earthquake Hazard Map 11

2.2.3 Liquefaction Hazard Map
The importance of a liquefaction hazard map lies in its ability to assess and communicate the risks
associated with liquefaction in areas prone to seismic activity.
Figure 2.7. Liquefaction Hazard Map
2.3 Geotechnical Report
Figure 2.8. Geotechnical report of Project Location
12
2.4 Description of the Structure
The proposed project is a 4-storey apartment located at Jose Abad Santos Ave, Brgy. San Jose
Matulid, Mexico Pampanga. Providing apartments for informal settlers is a crucial step towards
addressing their housing needs and improving their quality of life. Each unit has 2 bedrooms, 1 toilet and
bath, a living area, and a kitchen and dining area. Once they step out of their unit there is an easy access
balcony that is 2m meters long.
Room Quantity Area (m2) Location (Grid) Function

per floor
Bedrooms 40 16 B-C (1-2) per floor Accommodation,
D-E (1-2) per floor Sleeping, and
F-G (1-2) per floor Relaxation
H-I (1-2) per floor
J-K (1-2) per
floor L-M (1-2)
per floor
M-N (1-2) per floor
Living Area 40 12 B-C (2-3) per floor Lounge and
D-E (2-3)) per floor Entertainment
F-G (2-3) per floor
H-I (2-3) per floor
J-K (2-3) per
floor L-M (2-3) per
floor
M-N (2-3) per floor
Toilet and Bathroom 40 8 B-C (1-2) per floor Bath, Defecation,
D-E (1-2) per floor and Urination
F-G (1-2) per floor
H-I (1-2) per floor
J-K (1-2) per
floor L-M (1-2)
per floor
M-N (1-2) per floor
13
Kitchen and Dining 40 12 B-C (2-3) per floor Food
D-E (2-3)) per floor
F-G (2-3) per floor
H-I (2-3) per floor
J-K (2-3) per
floor L-M (2-3) per
floor
M-N (2-3) per floor
Table 2.1: Description of the Structure
2.5 Building Plan
14
LOT TECHNICAL DESCRIPTION
2
LINES BEARINGS DISTANCE
N 55° 41' E
1-2 N 55° 41' E 50 METERS
2-3 S 30° 30' E 100 METERS
3-4 S 55° 41' W 50 METERS S 30° 30' E

PROPOSED BUILDING
4-1 N 30° 30' W 100 METERS
N 30° 30' W
3
S 55° 41' W
4
AREA = 5000m^2
PERIMETER = 300m
DESIGNER TITLE APPROVED BY SHEET CONTENT SHEET NO.
TANGUIN,LENNARD ALLEN T. PROPOSED 4 STOREY ENGR. TADIOSA, JEROME SITE DEVELOPMENT A

APARTMENT Instructor
PLAN A-1
TANGUIN,LENNARD ALLEN T. PROPOSED 4 STOREY ENGR. TADIOSA, JEROME PERSPECTIVE VIEW A

APARTMENT Instructor A-2
A B C D E F G H I J K L M N
2950 6000 6000 6000 6000 6000 2950 6000 6000 6000 6000 6000 2950
2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000
1 1
UP W2 W2
W3
W2 W2
W3
W2 W2
W3
W2 W2
W3
W2 W2 W3
UP W2 W2
W3
W2 W2
W3
W2 W2
W3
W2 W2
W3
W2 W2
W3
UP
T&B T&B T&B T&B T&B T&B T&B T&B T&B T&B
STAIRS BR 1 BR 2 BR 1 BR 2 BR 1 BR 2 BR 1 BR 2 BR 1 BR 2 BR 1 BR 2 BR 1 BR 2 BR 1 BR 2 BR 1 BR 2 BR 1 BR 2
4000
D3 D3 D3 D3 D3 STAI RS D3 D3 D3 D3 D3 STAI RS
D2 D2 D2 D2 D2 D2 D2 D2 D2 D2
2 D2 D2 D2 D2 D2 D2 D2 D2 D2 D2
2
10000
10000
DINING AREA LIVING DINING AREA LIVING DINING AREA LIVING DINING AREA LIVING DINING AREA LIVING DINING AREA LIVING DINING AREA LIVING DINING AREA LIVING DINING AREA LIVING DINING AREA LIVING
4000
& KITCHEN AREA & KITCHEN AREA & KITCHEN AREA & KITCHEN AREA & KITCHEN AREA & KITCHEN AREA & KITCHEN AREA & KITCHEN AREA & KITCHEN AREA & KITCHEN AREA
3
W1 D1 W1 3
W1 D1 W1 W1 D1 W1 W1 D1 W1 W1 D1 W1 W1 D1 W1 W1 D1 W1 W1 D1 W1 W1 D1 W1
2000
W1 D1 W1
CORRIDOR CORRIDOR
4 4
68850
SCALE: 1:100
DESIGNER
TITLE APPROVED BY SHEET CONTENT SHEET NO.
TANGUIN,LENNARD ALLEN T. PROPOSED 4 STOREY ENGR. TADIOSA, JEROME GROUND A

FLOOR FLOOR A-3
PLAN
2950 6000 6000 6000 6000 6000 2950 6000 6000 6000 6000 6000 2950
2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000
1 1
UP W2 W2
W3
W2 W2
W3
W2 W2
W3
W2 W2
W3
W2 W2 W3
UP W2 W2
W3
W2 W2
W3
W2 W2
W3
W2 W2
W3
W2 W2
W3
UP
STAIRS
BR 1 BR 2 BR 1 BR 2 BR 1 BR 2 BR 1 BR 2 BR 1 BR 2 BR 1 BR 2 BR 1 BR 2 BR 1 BR 2 BR 1 BR 2 BR 1 BR 2
4000
D2 D2 D2 D2 D2 D2 D2 D2 D2 D2
2 D2 D2 D2 D2 D2 D2 D2 D2 D2 D2
2
10000
10000
4000
3
W1 D1 W1 3
2000
W1 D1 W1
CORRIDOR CORRIDOR
4 4
68850
SCALE: 1:100
DESIGNER
TANGUIN,LENNARD ALLEN T. PROPOSED 4 STOREY ENGR. TADIOSA, JEROME SECOND FLOOR A

FLOOR PLAN A-4
2950 6000 6000 6000 6000 6000 2950 6000 6000 6000 6000 6000 2950
2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000
1 1
W3 W3 W3 W3 W3 W3 W3 W3 W3 W3
W2 W2 W2 W2 W2 W2 W2 W2 W2 W2 W2 W2 W2 W2 W2 W2 W2 W2 W2 W2
4000
D3 D3 D3 D3 D3 STAIRS D3 D3 D3 D3 D3 STAI RS
D2 D2 D2 D2 D2 D2 D2 D2 D2 D2
2 D2 D2 D2 D2 D2 D2 D2 D2 D2 D2
2
10000
10000
4000
3
W1 D1 W1 3
2000
W1 D1 W1
CORRIDOR CORRIDOR
4 4
68850
SCALE: 1:100
DESIGNER
TANGUIN,LENNARD ALLEN T. PROPOSED 4 ENGR. TADIOSA, JEROME THIRD A

STOREY Instructor
FLOOR A-5
APARTMENT FLOOR PLAN
2950 6000 6000 6000 6000 6000 2950 6000 6000 6000 6000 6000 2950
2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000
1 1
UP W2 W2
W3
W2 W2
W3
W2 W2
W3
W2 W2
W3
W2 W2 W3
UP W2 W2
W3
W2 W2
W3
W2 W2
W3
W2 W2
W3
W2 W2
W3
UP
4000
D2 D2 D2 D2 D2 D2 D2 D2 D2 D2
2 D2 D2 D2 D2 D2 D2 D2 D2 D2 D2
2
10000
10000
4000
3
W1 D1 W1 3
2000
W1 D1 W1
CORRIDOR CORRIDOR
4 4
68850
SCALE: 1:100
DESIGNER
TANGUIN,LENNARD ALLEN T. PROPOSED 4 STOREY ENGR. TADIOSA, JEROME FOURTH FLOOR A

FLOOR PLAN A-6
2950 6000 6000 6000 6000 6000 2950 6000 6000 6000 6000 6000 2950
1 1
STAIRS
4000
STAIRS STAIRS
2 2
10000
10000
4000
3 3
2000
4 4
68850
SCALE: 1:100
DESIGNER
TANGUIN,LENNARD ALLEN T. PROPOSED 4 STOREY ENGR. TADIOSA, JEROME ROOF DECK A

FLOOR PLAN A-7
R.D. FLOOR FINISH

3000
F.F. FLOOR FINISH

3000
T.F. FLOOR FINISH

3000
S.F. FLOOR FINISH

3000
G.F. FLOOR FINISH

N.G.L
200
SCALE: 1:100
TANGUIN,LENNARD ALLEN T. PROPOSED 4 STOREY ENGR. TADIOSA, JEROME FRONT ELEVATION A

N M L K J I H G F E D C B A
R.D. FLOOR FINISH

3000
F.F. FLOOR FINISH

3000
T.F. FLOOR FINISH

3000
S.F. FLOOR FINISH

3000
G.F. FLOOR FINISH

N.G.L
200
N M L K J I H G F E D C B A
SCALE: 1:100
TANGUIN,LENNARD ALLEN T. PROPOSED 4 STOREY ENGR. TADIOSA, JEROME REAR ELEVATION A

4 3 2 1 1 2 3 4
R.D. FLOOR FINISH R.D. FLOOR FINISH

3000
3000
F.F. FLOOR FINISH F.F. FLOOR FINISH
3000
3000
T.F. FLOOR FINISH T.F. FLOOR FINISH
3000
3000
S.F. FLOOR FINISH S.F. FLOOR FINISH
3000
3000
G.F. FLOOR FINISH G.F. FLOOR FINISH
N.G.L N.G.L
200
200
4 3 2 1 1 2 3 4
RIGHT SIDE ELEVATION LEFT SIDE ELEVATION
SCALE: 1:100
TANGUIN,LENNARD ALLEN T. PROPOSED 4 STOREY ENGR. TADIOSA, JEROME RIGHT & LEFT A
SIDE ELEVATION A-10
900 800 800
2100
2100
2100
D1 - ENTRANCE DOOR
D2 - BEDROOM DOOR
D3 - BATHROOM DOOR
D1 D2 D3
W1 - FRONT WINDOW W2
- BEDROOM WINDOW 1000 1000 600
W3 - BATHROOM WINDOW
600
950
W1 1200 W2 W3
SCALE: 1:100
DESIGNER
TANGUIN,LENNARD ALLEN T. PROPOSED 4 STOREY ENGR. TADIOSA, JEROME SCHEDULE OF A

FINISHES DOORS AND A-11
WINDOWS
L
2950 6000 6000 6000 6000 6000 2950 6000 6000 6000 6000 6000 2950
2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000
1 1
STAIRS
4000
STAIRS STAIRS
2 2
10000
10000
4000
3 3
2000
4 4
68850
LEGENDS
CONCRETE FINISH PAINTED CEILING
LIGHTS
SCALE: 1:100
TANGUIN,LENNARD ALLEN T. PROPOSED 4 STOREY ENGR. TADIOSA, JEROME GROUND FLOOR A

CEILING PLAN A-12
2950 6000 6000 6000 6000 6000 2950 6000 6000 6000 6000 6000 2950
2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000
1 1
STAIRS
4000
STAIRS STAIRS
2 2
10000
10000
4000
3 3
2000
4 4
68850
LEGENDS
LIGHTS
SCALE: 1:100
DESIGNER
TANGUIN,LENNARD ALLEN T. PROPOSED 4 STOREY ENGR. TADIOSA, JEROME SECOND FLOOR A

CEILING PLAN A-13
2950 6000 6000 6000 6000 6000 2950 6000 6000 6000 6000 6000 2950
2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000
1 1
STAIRS
4000
STAIRS STAIRS
2 2
10000
10000
4000
3 3
2000
4 4
68850
LEGENDS
LIGHTS
SCALE: 1:100
DESIGNER
TANGUIN,LENNARD ALLEN T. PROPOSED 4 STOREY ENGR. TADIOSA, JEROME THIRD FLOOR A

CEILING PLAN A-14
2950 6000 6000 6000 6000 6000 2950 6000 6000 6000 6000 6000 2950
2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000
1 1
STAIRS
4000
STAIRS STAIRS
2 2
10000
10000
4000
3 3
2000
4 4
68850
LEGENDS
LIGHTS
SCALE: 1:100
DESIGNER
TANGUIN,LENNARD ALLEN T. PROPOSED 4 STOREY ENGR. TADIOSA, JEROME FOURTH FLOOR A

CEILING PLAN A-15
2950 6000 6000 6000 6000 6000 2950 6000 6000 6000 6000 6000 2950
1
4000
2 2
10000
10000
4000
3 3
2000
4 4
68850
LEGENDS
LIGHTS
FLOOR
SCALE: 1:100
DESIGNER

CEILING PLAN A-16
2950 6000 6000 6000 6000 6000 2950 6000 6000 6000 6000 6000 2950
2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000
1 WF1 WF1 WF1 WF2 WF1 WF1 WF2 WF1 WF1 WF2 WF1 WF1 WF2 WF1 WF1 WF2 WF1 WF1 WF1 WF2 WF1 WF1 WF2 WF1 WF1 WF2 WF1 WF1 WF2 WF1 WF1 WF2 WF1
1
WF2
WF2
WF2
WF2
WF2
WF2
WF2
WF2
WF2
WF2
FF3 FF3 FF3 FF3 FF3 FF3 FF3 FF3 FF3 FF3
WF2
WF2
WF2
WF2
WF2
WF2
WF2
WF2
WF2
WF2
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
STAIRS
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
4000
FF2 WF2 FF2 WF2 FF2 WF2 FF2 WF2 FF2 WF2 FF2 WF2 FF2 WF2 FF2 WF2 FF2 WF2 FF2 WF2
WF1 WF1 WF1 WF1 WF1 STAIRS WF1 WF1 WF1 WF1 WF1 STAIRS
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1 WF1 WF1 WF1 WF1 WF1 WF1 WF1 WF1 WF1
2 WF1 WF1 WF1 WF1 WF1 WF1 WF1 WF1 WF1 WF1 WF1 WF1 WF1 WF1 WF1 WF1 WF1 WF1 WF1 WF1
WF1
2
10000
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
4000
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
FF1
10000
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1 WF1 WF1 WF1 WF1 WF1 WF1 WF1 WF1 FF1 WF1 WF1 WF1 WF1 WF1 WF1 WF1 WF1 FF1
WF1
3
FF1
WF1
WF1 WF1 WF1 WF1 WF1 WF1 WF1 WF1 WF1 WF1 WF1 WF1 WF1 WF1 WF1 WF1 WF1 WF1 WF1 WF1
WF1 WF1
3
WF1
2000
FF1 FF1 FF1 FF1 FF1 FF1 FF1 FF1 FF1 FF1 FF1 FF1
WF1
WF1
4 WF1 WF1 WF1 WF1 WF1 WF1 WF1 WF1 WF1 WF1 WF1
WF1
4
68850
LEGENDS
FF1 CONCRETE CEMENT FINISH
FF2 FLAT TILE
FF3 LINOLEUM TILE
WF1
WF2
CONCRETE WALL FINISH PAINTED
CEMENT TILE FINISH

SCALE: 1:100
DESIGNER
TANGUIN,LENNARD ALLEN T. PROPOSED 4 STOREY ENGR. TADIOSA, JEROME
GROUND FLOOR A
SCHEDULE OF FINISHES A-17
2950 6000 6000 6000 6000 6000 2950 6000 6000 6000 6000 6000 2950
2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000
1
WF2
WF2
WF2
WF2
WF2
WF2
WF2
WF2
WF2
WF2
WF2
WF2
WF2
WF2
WF2
WF2
WF2
WF2
WF2
WF2
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
STAIRS
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
4000
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
2
10000
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
4000
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
FF1
10000
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
3
FF1
WF1
WF1 WF1
3
WF1
2000
WF1
WF1
WF1
4
68850
LEGENDS
FF2 FLAT TILE
FF3 LINOLEUM TILE
WF1
WF2
CEMENT TILE FINISH

SCALE: 1:100
DESIGNER
SECOND FLOOR A
2950 6000 6000 6000 6000 6000 2950 6000 6000 6000 6000 6000 2950
2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000
1
WF2
WF2
WF2
WF2
WF2
WF2
WF2
WF2
WF2
WF2
WF2
WF2
WF2
WF2
WF2
WF2
WF2
WF2
WF2
WF2
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
STAIRS
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
4000
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
2
10000
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
4000
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
FF1
10000
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
3
FF1
WF1
WF1 WF1
3
WF1
2000
WF1
WF1
WF1
4
68850
LEGENDS
FF2 FLAT TILE
FF3 LINOLEUM TILE
WF1
WF2
CEMENT TILE FINISH

SCALE: 1:100
DESIGNER
THIRD FLOOR A
2950 6000 6000 6000 6000 6000 2950 6000 6000 6000 6000 6000 2950
2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000
1
WF2
WF2
WF2
WF2
WF2
WF2
WF2
WF2
WF2
WF2
WF2
WF2
WF2
WF2
WF2
WF2
WF2
WF2
WF2
WF2
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
STAIRS
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
4000
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
2
10000
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
4000
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
FF1
10000
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
3
FF1
WF1
WF1 WF1
3
WF1
2000
WF1
WF1
WF1
4
68850
LEGENDS
FF2 FLAT TILE
FF3 LINOLEUM TILE
WF1
WF2
CEMENT TILE FINISH

SCALE: 1:100
DESIGNER
FOURTH FLOOR A
2950 6000 6000 6000 6000 6000 2950 6000 6000 6000 6000 6000 2950
1 WF1 WF1 WF1 WF1 WF1

1
STAIRS
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
WF1
4000
STAIRS STAIRS
WF1
2 2
10000
10000
FF1 FF1
4000
WF1
WF1
3 3
2000
WF1
WF1 WF1
4 4
68850
LEGENDS
FF2 FLAT TILE
FF3 LINOLEUM TILE
WF1
WF2
CEMENT TILE FINISH

SCALE: 1:100
DESIGNER

A
A UP
A
UP
UP
STAIRS
STAIRS STAIRS
SCALE: 1:100
TANGUIN,LENNARD ALLEN T. PROPOSED 4 STOREY ENGR. TADIOSA, JEROME TRANSVERSE SECTION A

Instructor A-22
APARTMENT
B
UP UP UP
STAIRS
STAIRS STAIRS
B
4 3 2 1
4 3 2 1
SCALE: 1:100
DESIGNER
TANGUIN,LENNARD ALLEN T. PROPOSED 4 STOREY ENGR. TADIOSA, JEROME LONGITUDINAL SECTION A

2.6 Design Loads
2.6.1 Dead Loads
The design loads and parameter provided below are governed by the National Structural Code of the
Philippines 2015 (NSCP 2015), Volume 1, Seventh Edition. Chapter 2, Table 204-1 for Minimum Densities
for Design Loads from Materials (kN/m3) and Table 204-2 for Minimum Design Dead Loads (kPa).
Materials Design Load

Concrete 24 kN/m3
Steel 77.3 kN/m3
Aluminum 26.7 kN/m3
4’’ CHB 2.75 kN/m3
6’’ CHB 2.15 kN/m3
Solid Flat Tile 1.10 kPa
Painted Concrete Ceiling 0.023 kPa per mm thickness
Cement Finish (25mm) on stone-concrete fill 1.53 kPa
Linoleum Tile 0.05 kPa
Cement Tile Finish (walls) 0.77 kPa
Ceramic Tile on 25 mm Mortar Bed (20 mm) 1.10 kPa
Concrete Wall Finish .023kPa per mm
Concrete floor fill 0.017 kPa per mm
Table 2.2: Dead Loads
2.6.2 Live Loads

Live loads are based on the provisions of National Structural Code of the Philippines (NSCP 2015),
Chapter 2, Table 205-1 for Minimum Uniform and Concentrated Live Loads (kPa/kN) and Table 205-2 for
Special Loads (kPa/kN).
Occupancy Load
Basic Floor Area 1.9 kPa
37
Exterior Balconies 2.94 kPa
Decks 1.94 kPa
Storage 1.9 kPa
Table 2.3: Live Loads
2.6.3 Wind Loads
Parameters Values
Basic Wind Speed (V) 270 kph (NSCP 2015 Vol. 1 Figure 207A.5-1C)
Wind Directionality Factor (Kd) 0.85 (NSCP 2015 Vol. 1 Section 207A.6)
Exposure Category Exposure C (NSCP 2015 Vol. 1 Section 207A.7)
Topography Factor (Kzt) 1.0 Flat Terrain (NSCP 2015 Vol. 1 Section
207A.8)
Gust Effect Factor 0.85 (NSCP 2015 Vol. 1 Section 207A.9)
Enclosure Classification Enclosed (NSCP 2015 Vol. 1 Section 207A.10)
Internal Pressure Coefficient (GCpi) ±0.18 (NSCP 2015 Vol. 1 Section 207A-11)
Table 2.3: Wind Loads.
Basic Wind Speed (V) – the basic wind speed has a 3-second gust wind speed kph at 10m above
the ground, it is used for determining the design of wind loads on structures. The proposed structure
falls under the Occupancy Category V Exposure C, therefore the value of (V) is based on NSCP 2015 Vol.
1 Section 207A.5-1C and Figure 207A.5-1C
Wind Directionality Factor (Kd) – the Wind Directionality factor is based on the NSCP 2015 Vol. 1
Section 207A.6, for Buildings, the Main Wind Force Resisting System (MWFRS) has a value of 0.85, and
the Architectural Elements (Components and Cladding) has a value of 0.85.
Exposure Category – the proposed building is categorized as an Exposure C; this is due to the site
having a flat terrain and grasslands. It is based on NSCP 2015 Vol. 1 Section 207A.7.
Topography Factor (Kzt) – is considered due to direction and wind speed can be affected depending on
the terrain of an area. The topography factor used is 1.0 due to the site being a flat terrain, based on
NSCP 2015 Vol. 1 Section 207A.8.
38
39
Gust Effect Factor – is defined as the ratio between peak wind gust and mean wind speed over a period
of time. It resulted to 0.85, based on NSCP 2015 Vol. 1 Section 207A.9.
Enclosure Classification – the proposed building is classified as an Open Building, since it has
walls that is 80% open. It is based on NSCP 2015 Vol. 1 Section 207A.10.
Internal Pressure Coefficient (GCpi) – resulted to 0.00 due to a classification of open building. It is based
on NSCP 2015 Vol. 1 Table 207A11-1.
2.6.4 Earthquake Loads

Parameters Values
Occupancy Category Category IV- Miscellaneous Structure (NSCP
2015 Vol. 1 Table 103-1)
Seismic Importance Factor (I) 1.0 Category IV (NSCP 2015 Vol. 1 Table 208-1)
Soil Profile Type Sc, SPT >50 (NSCP 2015 Vol. 1 Table 208-2)
Soil Profile Name Stiff Soil
Seismic Zone Zone 4 (NSCP 2015 Vol. 1 Section 208.4.4.1)
Seismic Source Type C (NSCP 2015 Vol. 1 Table 208-4)
Nearest Fault Line West Valley Fault
Near Source Factor (Na) 1.0 (NSCP 2015 Vol. 1 Section 208-5)
Near Source Factor (Nv) 1.0 (NSCP 2015 Vol. 1 Section 208-6)
Seismic Coefficient (Ca) 0.40 (NSCP 2015 Vol. 1 Section 208-7)
Seismic Coefficient (Cv) 0.56 (NSCP 2015 Vol. 1 Section 208-8)
Basic Seismic - Force Resisting System Depends on the Trade-offs:
1. Special Moment-Resisting Frame System
2. Dual System-SMRF concrete shear walls
3. SMRF with Steel Bracing
Numerical Coefficient for Over Strength and Depends on the Structural System:
Global Ductility Capacity or Response Reduction 1. SMRF: R=8.5
Factor (R) 2. Dual System, Shear Walls: R=8.5
3. RC Frame with Steel Bracing: R=5.0
(NSCP 2015 Vol. 1 Section 208-11A)
40
Numerical Coefficient for Period of Vibration (Ct) 0.0731 (Concrete) and 0.0853 (Steel) (NSCP
2015 Vol. 1 Section 208.5.2.2)
Table 2.4: Seismic Loads Parameters.
Occupancy Category – The proposed structure at Don Hilario Avenue falls under the category V, which
is a category that states a structure is a Miscellaneous Structure (Private Parking) (NSCP 2015 Vol.
1 Table 103-1).
Seismic Importance Factor – is a determination tool used in Risk Category. Primary tool used in
determining the lateral force of the design structure, but the main purpose/relevance of the Seismic
Importance factor is being able to provide additional strength for structure who are at risk or critical.
Soil Profile Type – is basis of the Ground Soil Strength and Stability, soil with certain characteristics and
properties affects its capacity. A soil that has good structure equates to more stable foundations.
2.6.5 Other Loads

A.Concrete Compressive Strength
Structural Member US SI
Slab-on-Grade 2,500 psi 17.5 MPa
Suspended Slab 4,000 psi 27.6 MPa
Column 4,000 psi 27.6 MPa
Beam 4,000 psi 27.6 MPa
Girder 4,000 psi 27.6 MPa
Table 2.5: Concrete Compressive Strength.
B.Reinforcing Steel Bars Yield Strength (fy)

Reinforcing Bar US SI
>16mm diameter 60,000 psi 414 MPa
<16mm diameter 40,000 psi 275 MPa
Table 2.6: Reinforcing Steel Bars.
41
C.Masonry Units, CHB (fm’)
Masonry Unit US SI
Non-Load Bearing CHB 500 psi 3.45 MPa
Table 2.7: Masonry Units Compressive Strength.
2.7 Review of Related

Literature
The performance of structures with circular columns and square columns in the structure of Rancacili
Silinder II building
According to (B. Kudwadi., et al. 2018) A structure's performance during an earthquake is determined
by analyzing the damage it sustains. A study was conducted on the Rancacili Silinder II residential building to
determine its structural performance based on variations in column. Three structural models were used: one
with circular and square columns (Structure type I), one with circular columns only (Structure type II),
and one with square columns only (Structure type III). The performance levels of all three models were found
to be at the same level, Immediate Occupancy (IO), meaning that they sustained only minimal damage
and retained their strength and stiffness after an earthquake. The model with the combined column cross
section (structure type I) had the smallest displacement values in both the X and Y directions, making it a good
choice for buildings in earthquake-prone areas.
Earthquake Analysis of Multi Storied Residential Building

According to (E. Pavan Kumar., 2014 ) An earthquake that occurs in a multi-storied building can cause
complete collapse if the structure is not well-designed and constructed with adequate strength. Therefore,
seismic analysis is necessary to ensure safety against seismic forces in multi-storied buildings. The study of
seismic analysis is essential to design earthquake-resistant structures. Structural seismic analysis employs
equivalent static analysis and response spectrum analysis methods to analyze the structures. In this study,
we analyzed a residential building of G+15 storied structure located in zone II using STAAD.PRO software.
It has observed that the special moment of resisting frame structure is better at resisting the seismic loads
compared to the ordinary moment resisting frame structure. The dynamic analysis of the special
moment
42
resisting frame structure performed better in resisting the earthquake forces than the static analysis of the
ordinary moment resisting frame structure.
Comparison of Conventional and Advanced Concrete Technologies in terms of Construction

Efficiency
According to (S. Matej., et al. 2016 ) This study describes specific advanced concrete technologies and their
potential utilization in both monolithic structures and precast units. The article also highlights the benefits of
modern methods of construction (MMC) using advanced concrete technologies in precast
elements production. A comparison between conventional and advanced concrete technologies applied
in both monolithic structures and precast units is made based on selected aspects of construction
efficiency assessment, and the results demonstrate the significance of applying advanced concrete
technologies in modern methods of concrete structures production to enhance construction efficiency.
According to the opinions of professionals, the most significant contribution of modern concrete technologies
based on HPC and UHPC is the improvement of final product quality, including mechanical properties and
durability.
Sensitivity analysis of Life Cycle Assessment to select reinforced concrete structures with one-way
slabs
According to (J. Ferreiro., et al. 2017) This study analyzed the environmental impacts of selected
optimal solutions for one-way slabs in a prototype building through a sensitivity analysis. The study
considered various factors such as the structural alternatives, resistance components, lightening
materials, and performance or yield during the execution stage, which includes transport of components to
the building site and waste management. The study evaluated three variables, namely distance traveled
for component transport, working hours, and materials wasted during the production and
construction process, and established limit values for six possible scenarios. The results indicated that
hourly yield had minimal effect on the environmental impact, while transport and material waste were the
primary factors that contributed to the variations in environmental impact.
43
Experimental and numerical analysis of RC two-way slabs strengthened with Near-surface mounted
Carbon Fiber Reinforced Polymer (NSM CFRP) rods
According to (F. Gilles., and L. Oualid.,) The paper discusses the potential benefits of using near surface
mounted (NSM) fibre reinforced polymer (FRP) to increase the flexural strength of reinforced concrete (RC)
members. Specifically, it focuses on the use of NSM carbon fibre reinforced polymers (CFRP) rods to
strengthen RC two-way slabs. The first part of the paper presents the results of an experimental
investigation into the use of NSM CFRP rods on RC two-way slabs. The results show that this technique
improves the bearing capacity of the slabs, and is more effective than the externally bounded (EB) strips
technique. In the second part of the paper, a 2D finite element model is used to describe the elastic
behavior of RC slabs strengthened with NSM CFRP rods. Overall, the NSM technique is found to be more
economical due to the lower carbon fibre quantity required, and also results in a more ductile behavior.
Additionally, a 2D finite element linear model for composite orthotropic plate is developed to describe
elastic behavior of RC slabs strengthened with NSM FRP rods in the serviceability state.
44
CHAPTER 3
45
CHAPTER 3: CONSTRAINTS, TRADE-OFFS, AND STANDARDS
3.1 Design Constraints

The Design constraints are restrictions that specify what can and cannot be included in the design. Any
project has constraints and risks, which must be considered to ensure success. Material
limitations compatibility standards, user preferences, and safety regulations are a few examples of these
restrictions. Design limitations are frequently asserted to be advantageous in the creation of a design since
they reduce the range of feasible potentials and point towards an obvious solution. To guarantee that
the end result satisfies the client's wants and expectations while meeting the desired specifications, all
restrictions must be taken into account and managed. The constraints guarantee the structure's stability and
safety.
3.1.1 Quantitative Constraints

3.1.1.1 Economic Constraints
Financial limitations and money allocation are the basis of economic constraints. To make it simple, economic
constraints are primarily related to money. Projects without sufficient budgets would not be able to
successfully accomplish the suggested goals and objectives for productivity and quality standards. The
success of the project in terms of quality, safety, functionality, and performance may suffer if the budget is
insufficient or allocated incorrectly. As a result, the project's progress determines how much money will be
allocated within the budget. The client insisted that the costs must not go above the allotted budget for the
project, therefore the designers came up with a range of designs that would satisfy the client and examined
them to find the most effective design that would fit within the client's budget.
3.1.1.2 Constructability Constraint

All aspects of a project are influenced by constructability, especially those that have to do with engineering
and architecture. Constructability constraints are the restrictions and difficulties encountered during the
construction process. As projects become more complicated, the problem of constructability becomes
important. It can limit design options to those that can be effectively and efficiently built given the resources,
budget, and timeline that are already available. Before a project is built, constructability constraints should
be identified to reduce or prevent error, and delays.
46
3.1.1.3 Sustainability Constraints
Considering different factors affecting the final design of the project, the life span of each moment resisting
frame system incorporated in the apartment building will determine if the project is sustainable or not. The
designer’s final design recommendation will be chosen by the client because of the satisfaction from the
longer life span of the building. Correspondingly, the longer the life span, the favorable it is for the designer
and for the client.
3.1.2 Qualitative Constraints

3.2.1.2 Architectural Constraints
While considering the aesthetic and creative components of the design, designers must carefully evaluate
the code requirements, condition of the site, the function of the building, and zoning restrictions. These
restrictions are made to guarantee that their design is practical, safe, compliant, and satisfies the demands
of the people in the community.
3.2.1.2 Social Constraints

Social constraints refers to the societies cultural background, heritage, health, and welfare. Understanding
the people, their background, community laws, regulations, needs to be considered to what kinds of building,
development, and economic activity can take place. The building is designed to be beneficial to the people
in the community.
3.2 Trade-offs
For the trade-offs, the designer considered different types of structural members for trade-offs. One (1) for
the structural system, column, and foundation, and two (2) for slabs, and columns. To choose the final
trade-off, it will be done by combining structural members to form a structural system.
In order to satisfy all of the constraints mentioned above, the designer presents trade-offs. The designer will
evaluate each trade-off to determine which is more workable and effective given each constraint. The
designer's goals are to choose the trade-off that is most economical, has low maintenance costs throughout
the project, can endure potential consequences or dangers, takes less time to create, and is the safest for
workers and the general public.
47
Trade-off Number
Structural System 1 {SMRF}
Columns 2 {(Rectangular and Circular)}
Beams & Girders 1 {(Rectangular)}
Slab 2 {(One-way Slabs and Two-way Slabs)}
Foundation 1 {Isolated Footings}
Table 3.1 List of Tradeoffs
Number of possible trade-offs = (1)(2)(1)(2)(1) = 4 tradeoffs
3.2.1 Structural System
3.2.1.1 Special Moment-Resisting Frame (SMRF)
Moment resisting frames are commonly utilized in both steel and concrete construction. A Special Moment
Resisting Frame (SMRF) is a structural system used in construction that is specifically engineered to
withstand lateral forces such as those arising from earthquakes or strong winds. The connection between
the beams and columns is rigid, preventing any rotation between them. Special moment resisting
frames (SMRF) are designed to endure significant inelastic deformations and allow for controlled motions
during an earthquake. The connections between the beams and columns are essential to the system's
functionality, providing both rigidity and flexibility. According to the National Structural Code of the
Philippines (NSCP), SMRF is a moment-resisting steel frame that can withstand lateral pressures without
relying on the structure's walls for support in the direction where the framework is weak. SMRFs are
necessary for structures located in seismically active regions or those considered high-risk structures.
Figure 3.1 Special Moment-Resisting Frame (SMRF)
48
(Source: Google)
3.2.2 Columns
3.2.2.1 Rectangular/ Square Section
Rectangular/Square reinforced concrete sections are widely used in construction. It is commonly employed
due to rectangular or square columns are simpler to build and cast. Rectangular/Square sections are simpler
to shutter and support against collapse under pressure while the concrete is still in a flowable form.
Figure 3.2.Rectangular/ Square Columns

(Source: Google)
Advantages Disadvantages
 Formwork is easy for a  Compared to other column shapes,
rectangular/square column due to its rectangular section columns are
straight sides. more likely to buckle when the
 For projects with limited space, width-to-depth ratio is greater than
rectangular section columns are 2.0.
preferable because they take up a  Compared to other columns,
smaller area than other column rectangular columns have a lower
shapes. load capacity and might not be
 Simple geometry allows for quick appropriate for projects with heavy
and efficient construction. loads.
Table 3.2 Advantages and Disadvantages of Rectangular/ Square Columns
3.2.2.2 Circular Section
The design of axially loaded circular columns depends on their cross-sectional shape and material properties.
This is because the entire cross-sectional area of the column is compressed and the weight acts at the
49
center
50
of the column. However, in reality, columns are rarely perfectly vertical, which makes it difficult to
achieve complete compression. This results in loads being eccentric with respect to the center of the column.
Figure 3.3 Circular Columns

(Source: Google)
 Circular column is suitable in higher  More skill and better formwork
seismic zones where high materials are required to create
compressive strength and higher circular shapes without corners and
ductility are needed in all directions. edges.
 Circular columns are aesthetically  The circular column may restrict the
pleasing. design options for a building's
 Because of their superior overall aesthetic, especially in
strength- to-weight ratio, circular buildings with specific architectural
columns are the best choice for requirements.
structures that
needs a high load-carrying capacity.
Table 3.3 Advantages and Disadvantages of Circular Columns
3.2.3 Beams & Girders
3.2.3.1 Rectangular Section

Reinforced concrete beams are utilized as structural elements that can support transverse external loads.
These loads create torsion, shear forces, and bending moments along the length of the beams.
Concrete has low tensile strength but high compressive strength. To compensate, steel reinforcement is used
to absorb tensile stresses in reinforced concrete beams. Beams also bear the weight of other
components such as walls, columns, and slabs, transferring the loads to supporting columns. Beams
can be cantilevered,
51
continuous, or simply supported and can be created in various shapes such as L-shaped, T-
shaped, rectangular, or square. Double- or single-reinforced beams are used depending on the depth of the
beam.
Figure 3.4. Rectangular Beams

(Source: Google)
3.2.4 Slab
3.2.4.1 One-way Slab
A one-way slab is a type of concrete slab that transmits loads to the supporting beams and columns in a
single direction, resulting in bending occurring only in one direction. These slabs have a simple design and
are easy to construct. One-way slabs are a type of concrete slab that are reinforced to span between
two supports in a single direction. They are commonly used in buildings with a rectangular floor plan, where
the slab is supported by parallel walls or beams. To withstand the applied loads, reinforcement is placed in the
bottom of the slab where tensile stresses are highest. One-way slabs are a popular and straightforward option
for construction and are utilized in a variety of buildings, including residential and commercial structures like
apartments, offices, and parking garages.
Figure 3.5 One Way Slab

(Source: Google)
52
One-way slabs are suitable for long and narrow One-way slabs are more prone to cracking due
spaces, where they can be easily supported by to their limited span capacity and reduced
walls or beams running parallel to one another. thickness, which can reduce their durability.
One-way slabs are easy to construct and do not One-way slabs do not provide as much
require complex formwork, making them an structural integrity as other types of slabs, such
efficient and cost-effective option. as two-way slabs, which can limit their use in
certain applications.
Table 3.4 Advantages and Disadvantages of One Way Slab
3.2.4.2 Two-way Slab
A two-way slab carries the load on the slab in two directions, perpendicular to each other, with the help
of both primary and secondary reinforcement. The primary reinforcement is designed to resist the
bending moment caused by the load and is provided in both directions. The secondary reinforcement,
usually mild steel bars, provides reinforcement against shear forces and helps to control cracking.
Figure 3.5 Two Way Slab

(Source: Google)
Reduces the need for additional support elements Requires more reinforcement and more careful
like columns and beams, which can save on placement of reinforcement bars.
construction costs.
Can be designed to handle heavier loads and .Generally not as economical for smaller spans
longer spans. and lower loads.
53
Table 3.5 Advantages and Disadvantages of Two Way Slab
3.2.5 Foundation
3.2.5 Isolated Footing

Isolated footings can also be called pad, spread footings, and sloped footings and it is most of the time used
when the foundations are shallow. It is used to carry or spread concentrated loads which can be caused by
columns or pillars. It can consist of either reinforced or non-reinforced materials which are usually square,
rectangle, or circle in shape. Each type of footing is selected based on the condition of the soil and the
configuration of imposed loads. Isolated footings are one of the most economical types of footings and it is
used when columns are spaced at long distances.
Figure 3.5 Isolated Footing

(Source: Google)
54
3.3 Multiple Constraints Using Initial Normalization Method
After the evaluation of the initial estimate, the rough computation was applied. The scale or weight
of each criterion is determined by the designer’s perspective and the client’s specifications. The equation to
be used for the ability to fulfill the criteria in Normalized Data calculation is:
𝑀𝑎𝑥𝑖𝑚𝑢𝑚 − 𝐴𝑐𝑡𝑢𝑎𝑙
𝑁𝑜𝑟𝑚𝑎𝑙𝑖𝑧𝑒𝑑 𝐷𝑎𝑡𝑎 (𝑁𝐷) = ( 𝑥 9) + 1
𝑀𝑎𝑥𝑖𝑚𝑢𝑚 − 𝑀𝑖𝑛𝑖𝑚𝑢𝑚
The weight percentage is determined based on the optimal percentages of each performance
parameter as agreed upon, depending on the resulting value. All criteria used in the trade-off calculation
should be up to 100 percent (100%).
𝑊𝑒𝑖𝑔ℎ𝑡𝑒𝑑 𝑆𝑢𝑚 ∑(𝑊𝑒𝑖𝑔ℎ𝑡𝑒𝑑 𝑃𝑒𝑟𝑐𝑒𝑛𝑡𝑎𝑔𝑒 𝑥 𝑁𝐷)
The design trade-off with the highest total value for each context will be used in the design.
3.1.2 Initial Assessment of Trade-offs

Trade - offs Economic Constructability Sustainability
Constraints (₱) Constraints (₱) Constraint (₱)
FRAMING SMRF 15,689,423.32

5,961,980.86 1,098,259.63
BEAM Rectangular/
Square 11,257,639.20 4,277,902.90 788,034.74
Rectangular/
COLUMN Square 13,546,893.20 5,147,819.42 948,282.52
Circular 12964532.3 4,926,522.27 907,517.26
One Way
Slabs 6,552,268.90 2,489,862.18 458,658.82
Two Way
7,148,751.40 2,716,525.53 500,412.60
55
FOUNDATION Isolated 3799399.25 1,443,771.72 265,957.95
Table 3.10: Initial Assessment of Trade-offs
3.1.3 Normalized Data

Constraints (₱) Constraints (₱) Constraint (₱)
10 10 10
FRAMING SMRF
BEAMS Rectangular / 10 10 10
Square
Rectangular/ 1 1 1
COLUMN Square
Circular 10 10 10
One Way 10 10 10
SLAB
Two Way 1 1 1
10 10 10
FOUNDATION Isolated
Table 3.11: Normalized Data of Trade-offs
3.1.4 Third Weighted Sum of Various Percentage of Weight

Constraints Constraints (₱) Constraint (₱) Weighted
(₱ ) Sum
10 10 10 10
FRAMING SMRF
BEAMS Rectangular/ 10 10 10 10
Square
56
Rectangular/ 1 1 1 1
COLUMN Square
Circular 10 10 10 10
One way 10 10 10 10
SLABS
Two Way 1 1 1 1
FOUNDATION Isolated 10 10 10 10
.333 .333 .333 1.0

WEIGHT
Table 3.12: Weighted Sum of Trade-offs
3.4 Design Codes and Standards
3.4.1 National Structural Code of the Philippines (NSCP)
ASEP acknowledges the desired latest structural code dealing with the design and installation of structural
systems through requirements that highlight to the accomplishment. The new National Structural Code of the
Philippines (NSCP Volume I) is formulated to meet these needs through different model codes/restrictions,
generally from the United States, for the protection of the public health and safety nationwide.
Table 421.2.1 – Strength reduction factors for flexure, shear, axial and torsion
Table 421.2.2 – Strength reduction factor for moment, axial force or combine moment & axial force
Section 409.5.1 – Ultimate strength design
Table 405.3.1 – Load combinations (USD)
Table 422.2.2.4.3 – Values for β1, values for equivalent rectangular stress block
Table 409.3.1.1 – Minimum depth for non-prestressed beam
Section 409.6 – Reinforcement limits
Section 409.3.3 – Reinforcement strain limit in non-prestressed beams
Section 425.2 – Minimum spacings of reinforcements
Table 422.5.5 – Shear capacity of Non-prestressed without axial force
Table 422.5.5.1 – Detailed method on calculating shear capacity
57
Table 409.6.3.1 – Cases where Av,min is not required
58
Table 409.6.3.3 – Cases where Av,min is required
Table 409.7.6.2.2 – Maximum spacing of shear reinforcement
Table 425.3.1 – Standard hook geometry for development of deformed bars in tension
Table 425.3.2 – Minimum inside bend diameters and standard hook geometry
Section 422.7.6 – Torsional strength
Table 406.3.1.1 – Minimum thickness of solid non-prestressed one way slabs
Section 419.2.2 – Modulus of Elasticity of concrete
Table 419.2.4.2 – Modification factor for concrete
Section 409.5.4 – Design for torsion
Section 422.2.2.4.1 – Whitney stress-distribution block assumption
Table 425.4.2.2 – Development length for deformed bars and defored wires in tension
Section 425.4.3 – Development of standard hooks in tension
Table 425.5.2.1 – Lap splice length (tension)
Table 425.5.5.1 – Lap splice length (tension)
Section 418 – Earthquake resistant structures
3.4.2 The National Building Code of the Philippines (NBCP).
The designers used the following sections of NBCP:

1.Types of Construction: NBCP Chapter IV, Section 401
2.Classification and General Requirement of All Buildings by Use of Occupancy: NBCP Chapter
VII, Section 701
3.Allowable Floor Areas: NBCP Chapter VII, Section 705
3.4. .3 American Institute of Steel Construction (AISC)
The American Institute of Steel Construction (AISC) is a non-profit organization that provides technical
assistance, research, education, and advocacy for the structural steel industry in the United States of
America. AISC serves as a tool for Engineers, Architects, and other professionals for steel dimensions and
properties that can be used in designing a structure. AISC advocates for the use of steel as a substitute in
other construction material, since it offers safety, sustainability, and cost-effective in terms of building material
applications, this code provisions specifically provides guidelines that can help professionals to design and
fabricate
59
60
CHAPTER 4
61
CHAPTER 4: DESIGN METHODOLOGY AND RESULTS
4.1 General Design Process
The trade-offs were analyzed and designed by the designers using STAAD. The initial steps of the design
process involved modeling and assigning approximate member sizes. Subsequently, the design loads were
applied to the model in compliance with the code. After load assignment, the structural system underwent
scrutiny. To design the members and connections, the designers referred to NSCP 2015 and AISC 360-10.
The iterative design process of the designers is illustrated in the figure below.
Figure 4-1: General Design Process
62
4.1.1 List of Tradeoffs
1st: SMRF – Rectangular/ Square Beam - Rectangular/ Square Column – One way Slab – Isolated
Footing 2nd: SMRF – Rectangular/ Square Beam - Rectangular/ Square Column – Two-way Slab – Isolated
Footing 3rd: SMRF – Rectangular/ Square Beam - Circular Column – One way Slab – Isolated Footing
4.2 Methodologies for Design Loads

4.2.1 Gravity Loads
The dead loads were applied to the main structure of the building. Analyzation of the framing System
(SMRF) and utilization of load combinations was done, which is in accordance to the National Structural
Code of the Philippines (NSCP 2015), Chapter 2, Section 203.1 Basic Load Combinations.
Figure 4.2. Gravity Loads Design Process (DL and LL)
63
4.2.1.1 Dead Loads
Figure 4.3. Dead Loads of First Trade Off
Figure 4.4. Dead Loads of Second Trade Off
Figure 4.5. Dead Loads of Third Trade Off
64
4.2.1.2 Live
Loads
Figure 4.6. Live Loads of First Trade Off
Figure 4.7. Live Loads of Second Trade

Off
Figure 4.8. Live Loads of Third Trade Off
65
4.2.1.3 Wind Loads along X and Y
Figure 4.9. Wind Loads along X and Z of First Trade Off
Figure 4.10. Wind Loads along X and Z of Second Trade Off
Figure 4.11. Wind Loads X and Z of Third Trade Off O
66
4.2.1.4 Seismic Loads
Figure 4.12. Seismic Loads along X and Z of First Trade Off
Figure 413. Seismic Loads along X and Z of Second Trade Off
Figure 4.14. Seismic Loads along X and Z of Third Trade Off
67
4.4 Analysis Result For Tradeoffs
4.4.1 Section Properties
4.4.1.1 1st Trade Off Section Properties
Figure 4.14. Seismic Loads along X and Z of First Trade Off
4.4.1.2 2nd Trade Off Section Properties
Figure 4.14. Seismic Loads along X and Z of second Trade Off
68
4.4.1.3 3rd Trade Off Section Properties
Figure 4.14. Seismic Loads along X and Z of Third Trade Off
69
CHAPTER 5: Final Design
5.1 Final Model of the Structure
In this chapter, the final design of the proposed structure materials is presented, such as the design of
structural members columns, beams, and girders.
WINNER:
3rd: SMRF – Rectangular/ Square Beam - Circular Column – One way Slab – Isolated Footing
Figure 5.1 Structure of Winning Combination
70
5.2 Final Design of Report
Figure 5.2 Final Design Report of Winning Combination
71
5.3 Support Reaction Summary of Winning Section
Figure 5.3 Support Reaction Summary of Winning Section
5.3.1 Column 1 Concrete Design
Figure 5.4 Concrete Design of Column
72
5.3.2 Column 2 Concrete Design
Figure 5.5 Concrete Design of Column 2
5.3.3 Beam 1 Concrete Design
Figure 5.4 Concrete Design of Column 1
Figure 5.5 Concrete Design of Beam 1
73
5.3.4 Beam 2 Concrete Design
Figure 5.6 Concrete Design of Beam 2
74
References:
Mexico, Pampanga Profile – PhilAtlas. (1990, May 1).
https://www.philatlas.com/luzon/r03/pampanga/mexico.html
Pampanga topographic map, elevation, terrain. (n.d.). Topographic Maps. https://en-ph.topographic-
map.com/map-pmdzs/Pampanga/?center=15.06678%2C120.72443&zoom=15
Verge Permaculture Contour Map Regenerative Land Design Mapping Tool<. (n.d.). Verge Permaculture
Contour Map Regenerative Land Design Mapping Tool. https://contourmapgenerator.com/?
fbclid=IwAR3z7fOgVZfmVOM-
QX7egwhxb38tX2gX6vq5sQM9haKTlvL_64I_dztzTCY#14/15.0557/120.7154
Obinna, U. (2022). Moment-Resisting Frames - Structville. Structville. https://structville.com/moment-
resisting-frames
Earthquake Analysis of Multi Storied Residential Building - A Case Study. (2014). E. Pavan Kumar , a.
Naresh , M. Nagajyothi , M. Rajasekhar, 4.
Špak, M., Kozlovská, M., Struková, Z., & Bašková, R. (2016). Comparison of Conventional and Advanced
Concrete Technologies in terms of Construction Efficiency. Advances in Materials Science and
Engineering, 2016, 1–6. https://doi.org/10.1155/2016/1903729
Ferreiro-Cabello, J., Fraile-Garcia, E., Martínez, E., & Perez-De-La-Parte, M. (2017). Sensitivity analysis of
Life Cycle Assessment to select reinforced concrete structures with one-way slabs. Engineering
Structures, 132, 586–596. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2016.11.059
Foret, G., & Limam, O. (2008). Experimental and numerical analysis of RC two-way slabs strengthened
with NSM CFRP rods. Construction and Building Materials, 22(10), 2025–2030.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2007.07.027
75

Ce015 Cec32s4 Tanguin DP

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

You might also like

Ce015 Cec32s4 Tanguin DP

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

Ce015 Cec32s4 Tanguin DP

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Major Design Experience Information

CE 015 (Principles of Reinforce Concrete Design)

Student Tanguin, Lennard Allen T.

Rectangular/Square reinforced concrete sections are widely used in construction. It

Tradeoffs (Beams and Girders)

Tradeoffs (Framing System)

The American Institute of Steel Construction (AISC) is a non-profit organization that

CE 015 (Principles of Reinforce Concrete Design)

ACADEMIC INTEGRITY PLEDGE

Tanguin, Lennard Allen T.

Figure 1.1 Perspective View....................................................................................................1

Figure 1.2. Project Location (Satellite View)................................................................................2

Figure 1.3. Kinaiya Design Studios Logo....................................................................................2

Figure 1.4. Project Development.............................................................................................. 5

Figure 2.1 Vicinity Map.......................................................................................................... 7

Figure 2.2 Population Growth of Mexico Pampanga (1903 to 2020)..................................................7

Figure 2.2 Age Group of Mexico Pampanga (2015)......................................................................8

Figure 2.3 Socio-Economic Data of Mexico Pampanga (2009 to 2016).............................................9

Figure 2.4a. Topography (Source: contourmapgenerator.com).........................................................10

Figure 2.4b. Topography (Source: en-ph.topographic-map.com).....................................................10

Figure 2.5. Food Hazard Map..................................................................................................11

Figure 2.6. Earthquake Hazard Map..........................................................................................11

Figure 2.7. Liquefaction Hazard Map........................................................................................12

Figure 2.8. Geotechnical report of Project Location.......................................................................12

Figure 3.1 SMRF.................................................................................................................. 36

Figure 3.2 Rectangular Column................................................................................................37

Figure 3.3 Circular Columns..................................................................................................38

Figure 3.4 Rectangular Beams…........................................................................................................39

Figure 3.5 One Way Slab.................................................................................................................40

Figure 3.6 Two Way Slab..................................................................................................................40

Figure 3.7 Isolated Footing................................................................................................................41

Figure 4.1 General Design Process..........................................................................................48

Figure 4.3 Gravity Loads of Tradeoff 1......................................................................................49

Figure 4.4 Gravity Loads of Tradeoff 2......................................................................................50

Figure 4.5 Gravity Loads of Tradeoff 3......................................................................................50

Figure 4.6 Transfer of Wind Loads of 1st Tradeoff..............................................................................50

Figure 4.7 Transfer of Wind Loads of 2nd Tradeoff..............................................................................51

Figure 4.8 Transfer of Wind Loads of 3rd Tradeoff...............................................................................51

Figure 4.9 Transfer of Seismic Loads 1st Tradeoff...............................................................................51

Figue 4.12 1st Tradeoff Section Properties..........................................................................................52

Figure 4.13 2nd Tradeoff Section Properties….......................................................................................52

Figure 4.14 3rd Tradeoff Section Properties…........................................................................................53

Figure 5.1 Structure of Winning Combination........................................................................................54

Figure 5.2 Support reaction Summary of Winning Section..............................................................54

Figure 5.3 Final Design Report................................................................................................55

Table 2.1 Description of Structure.........................................................................................13

Table 2.2 Dead Loads...................................................................................................................26

Table 2.3 Live Loads.....................................................................................................................27

Table 2.4 Wind Loads...................................................................................................................27

Table 2.5 Concrete Compressive Strength......................................................................................29

Table 2.6 Reinforcing Steel Bars....................................................................................................30

Table 2.7 Masonry Unit Compressive Strength................................................................................30

Table 3.1 Overview of Trade Offs...................................................................................................36

Table 3.3 Advantage and Disadvantage of Rectangular Column..................................................37

Table 3.4 Advantage and Disadvantage Circular Column............................................................39

Table 3.5 Advantage and Disadvantage One Way Slab................................................................40

Table 3.6 Advantage and Disadvantage Two way Slab...............................................................41