You are on page 1of 44

CHAPTER 3 SUPERSTRUCTURE DESIGN

3.1. Structural Design Methodology and Audit


Superstructure design was carried out systematically in two stages - preliminary and detailed design, in order to produce the optimum design for the client. Finite Element Analysis (FEA) was employed for most of the structural design and analysis, especially through ETABS and SAFE. Lastly, the manual design calculations were developed for cross-checking and design audit purpose. The flow chart below illustrates the structural design methodology that has been adopted for the entire design process. The design methodology is summarised in Figure 3.1 bellow.

Figure .1: Structural design methodology and audit 3

3.2. Codes and Standard for Detailed Design


Below are the code and standards used for the superstructure detailed design, British Standard are the main references especially for RC and Steel design.

17

Concrete design Steelwork design Weight of materials Imposed loads Section shapes UBBL Foundations Site investigation

BS 8110:1997 BS 5950: Part 1 BS 648 BS 6399: Part 1 BS 4848: Part 4 1984: 2010 BS 8004 (1986) BS 5930 (1999)

3.3. Preliminary Design (Finite Element) Using ETABS


Integrated Building Design Software (ETABS) is a Finite Element software produced by Computer and Structure Incorporation (CSI) to analyze the building performance and structural design of vertical elements such as columns, walls and foundation system based on Finite Element Method. The initial sizing of vertical members was obtained by manipulating the concrete grades, member size, reinforcement bars, location of support and etc. After obtaining the preliminary sizing of vertical elements, the detailed design of RC flat slabs was carried out in SAFE - Structural and Earthquake Engineering Software. SAFE is widely used for modeling of RC flat slab, analysis, designs & preliminary sizing based on Finite Element Method

3.4. Detailed Design of Slab System


Functions: Modelling of reinforced concrete flat slabs and beams, analysis, designs and preliminary sizing using finite element method. 3.4.1 Design procedure of flat slab system using SAFE (e.g. Level 7) Step 1: Tracing of structural elements from architectural drawings

18

Figure .2: Architectural drawing (Level7) 3

Figure .3: Tracing of structural 3 elements

Step 2: Import scaled drawing into SAFE

Figure .4: Scaled drawing - Imported into SAFE 3

Step 3: Define and assign materials properties

Structural Properties Slab Properties Beam Properties Column Properties = = = S275 No beam C300
300mm) (Thickness 275mm) (Flat slab system) (Rectangular column 300mm x

19

Wall Supports General Properties

W200

(RC walls thickness 200mm)

Modulus of Elasticity = Poisson Ratio RC Unit Weight Concrete Cover Concrete Strength Reinforcing Yield Stress

27 kN/mm = 0.2 = 24 kN/m = 40 mm = 35 N/mm = 460 N/mm

Step 4: Dead Load Live Load

Define loading schedule = = = Self weight of slab 2.0 kN/m 0.75 kN/m
(24 kN/m) (BS 6399: Part 1 - Normal functions) (Roof - Maintenance purpose)

Superimposed = Dead Load (SDL) Special Case (SDL) = 5.0 kN/m

1.0 kN/m = =

(Brick wall partitions + screed /


finishes)

26.0 ~ 28.0 kN/m

(Roof water tank) (Roof Garden - Assume 50cm thick soils) 7.5 kN/m (M&E - Assumptions w/o specifications)

Step 5: Define analysis options Load Combination = = SLS (serviceability loads) - Checking of deflection DL x 1, LL x 1, SDL x 1 ULT (Ultimate loads) - Structural Design Purpose DL x 1.4, LL x 1.6, SDL x 1.4

Static Load Case

Step 6: Assign structural elements, imposed & transferred loads

20

Figure .5: An example of flat slab model in SAFE (Level 7) 3 Step 7: Checking of slab deflection After running the finite-element analysis, the slab deflection is checked under two different conditions - elastic uncracked deflection and long term crack deflection. As displayed in the deflection contour diagram (Figure 26), the slab deflection under long term crack condition is more critical than the elastic-uncracked condition, due to the effect of creep and shrinkage. Therefore, for design purpose, the long-term deflection was checked in accordance to the BS code, which specified that the maximum slab deflection between two unsupported span should not more than L/250 or maximum 40mm, whichever is smaller. In case of excessive deflection, several factors were manipulated including concrete grade, slab thickness, vertical support and so on, until it fulfils the requirements.

Figure .6: Slab deflection under serviceability loads 3

21

Figure .7: Slab deflection under serviceability loads 3 Following on the procedures explained above, the analysis and design was carried out for the whole building (top roof to ground floor): 3.4.1. Design Summary

3.4.2. Special Design Considerations Case 1: Top Roof Due to the critical loads imposed by the roof water tank, the slab deflection was critical even though the slab thickness has been increased to 300mm, with concrete grade 50. So instead of keep on increasing the slab thickness, RC beams were introduced for a more economic design, and in the end the deflection was kept within the limit as shown below:

22

Figure .8: Introduction of RC beams 3 Case 2: Level 3 and Level 4

Figure .9: Variation of slab thickness due to different functions and loads 3 Case 3: Level 2 At level 2, critical deflection occurred at the 13m span car porch supported by the columns alone at the slab edge, so we introduced steel beams to resolve the issues in order to look after the aesthetic value. RC beams are not practical in this case as it will be very deep in size and indirectly reduce the clearance height for the car porch.

23

Figure .10: Critical deflection at 13-m span car porch 3

Figure .11: Deflection controlled through steel beam support 3 Case 4: Level 1 Due to the structural requirements, additional columns are proposed at the ground floor lobby area to cater for excessive deflection.

Figure .12: Location of proposed additional columns at the ground floor 3

24

3.4.3. Slab Reinforcement For the slab reinforcement bars, the minimum reinforcement as specified in the BS 8110 is 0.13% of the total cross-sectional area. To facilitate our calculation, the slab was designed based on the per meter strip, we provided T12 @ 200 for the basic rebar, top and bottom in X and Y direction, in order to fulfill the requirements. Consider per meter strip: BS 8110 = Minimum Reinforcement 0.13% bh = = 0.13 % x 1000mm x 300 mm (max. slab thickness) 390.0 mm

Provide T12 @ 200 for basic rebar

565.0 mm

Figure .13: Typical drawing of slab basic rebar 3 On top of the basic rebar, additional reinforcements are required at certain area where the bending moment and shear force are critical. To come out with a more accurate and economic design, SAFE was used to generate the amount and location of additional rebars on top of the basic rebar, based on per meter strip. The diagram below illustrates an example of additional top rebar near to the column support at level 7 slab, where higher number of compression bars are required due to the critical flexural stress at the slab. Thus, for one piece of continuous RC slab, the additional rebars will span in X and Y direction, top and bottom of the slab. The final output of the design will be basic rebars spanning each-way and each-face of the slab, plus the additional rebars at certain area where there are excessive bending moment and shear force. The diagram below illustrates the detailed drawing of additional top reinforcement bars in addition to the basic rebars at level 7. 25

3.4.4. Risk Assessment & Special Design Considerations

Risk assessment 1: Punching shear failure Reference: Report 1989 Punching Shear 1) Most critical consideration in flat plate design around the columns 2) Punching at a single column causes a major redistribution of load effects, and lead to potential progressive collapse 3) Instead of using thicker section, shear reinforcement in the form of shear heads, shear studs or stirrup cages may be embedded in the slab to enhance shear capacity at the edges of walls and columns 4) Drop panel is utilized to thicken the slab locally to eliminate punching shear failure 5) All critical columns at the building were checked against the punching shear failure, the top roof columns are exposed to punching shear 6) Based on the design calculation (Appendix C) the slab thickness was increased locally by providing the drop panel and shear studs to eliminate this issue. Behavior of Reinforced Concrete Flat Slab, P.E. Regan, CIRIA

Risk assessment 2: Holes Adjacent to columns - Trimmer Bars for Slab Openings Reference: Design of Reinforced Concrete Flat Slabs to BS 8110, Report 110

(2nd Edition) - R T Whittle MA Ceng MICE In the flat system, holes should not be placed at the column face, as they considerably reduce the moment transfer in one or both directions. Even if torsion links are provided in the slab adjacent to the column, it does not develop its design couple until large rotations occur

26

Figure .14: Holes adjacent to columns in flat slab system 3 When it is necessary to cut bars to fit a hole, replacement bars of the same diameter should be positioned along all sides of the hole. All replacement bars should extend a tension anchorage length beyond the edges of the hole.

Risk assessment 3: Concrete Cover - Fire Rating Architects recommendations: -1 hour fire rating -BS 8110 Part 1, Clause 3.3.6 - corresponding to minimal cover of 20 mm for continuous slab Our recommendations: -25mm (20+5) for all slabs and columns except: -For all concrete faces in contact with water or soil = (Applicable to ground floor slab & top roof slab) 3.4.5. Manual Design Calculation for Flat Slab Design Refer to the folder name superstructure design in the attached CD. Cover 40mm

3.5. Detailed Design of Column System


3.5.1. Column Reactions based on the SAFE Output - Finite Element Method The ultimate column reactions were obtained from the SAFE output (Figure 45) as it is more accurate and precise compared to the approximate area method. The cumulative loadings for all floors are enclosed in Refer to the folder name superstructure design in the attached CD.

27

Figure .15: Column reactions generated from SAFE 3 To carry out the design, we have developed our own spreadsheet (attached in the CD) and design calculations (attached in the CD). The design summary is shown in the table below: Table .1: Design summary for RC columns 3

The RC columns were designed for the whole building based on the most critical ultimate loads obtained for each floor. The smallest column size is 300 x 300 for the top roof and increased gradually to 525 x 525mm at the ground floor, all using concrete grade 35.

28

We have tried to manipulate the concrete grade but apparently it did not helped much in reducing the column size, therefore we decided to use the same concrete grade for all level to minimize variations and facilitate the construction on site as well. Basically there were no any changes to the proposed column location in the architectural drawings, but additional columns are required to be introduced at ground floor to cater for slab deflection. As explained, the column dimension can be standardized for the whole floor to minimize variations and facilitate the contractors works, but it is not cost efficient as the column size was designed based on the most critical load. Therefore, we carried out some value engineering by designing the column size in batches based on the loading range, and 5 typical column sizes were produced for the whole building. Based on our study, the proposed method will produce some minor variation in the column size for a particular floor (Figure 48), and the same process was repeated for the whole building (Table 5). The tabulated results shown that the second method will save the concrete volume by approximately 50%. Table .2: Design of columns by batches based on the loading range 3

3.5.2. Detailing of RC Columns The detailing of the RC columns was carried out strictly in accordance to BS 8110, especially the main bars, links and hooks.

Detailing of RC Columns - In Accordance to BS Code of Practice: Main Bars: Minimum Reinforcement = 0.4% of Cross-Section 29

Maximum Reinforcement Maximum Reinforcement Minimum Bar Size Minimum No. of. Bar

= = = = =

6.0% of Cross-Section (Vertical Cast) 8.0% of Cross-Section (Precast) T12 or T13 4 for Square Column 6 for Circular Column

Links: Link Spacing compression Link Size Hooks: To be provided if face bar is more than 150mm of restrained bar The detailed drawing for second method, where the column sizes were designed based on the loading range is shown in Figure. = = 12 times the diameter of the smallest main bar bar (Maximum 300mm) Not less than 1/4 of the largest compression bar

Figure .16: Detailed drawing of column design (method 2) 3 The typical detailing of RC column in cross-sectional view, especially the anchorage length and compression lap is shown in Figure 51. Hooks are provided when the spacing of the face bar is more than 150mm of restrained bar. 3.5.3. Risk Assessment & Special Design Considerations

Risk assessment 1: Connection between Columns and Flat Slabs - Lateral Stiffness Reference: Design of Reinforced Concrete Flat Slabs to BS 8110, Report 110

(2nd Edition) - R T Whittle MA Ceng MICE The connection between the columns and flat slabs is unsuited to resist large bending moments. Even if the moment capacity is sufficient, the maximum shear capacity is likely to be exceeded because of the effect of moment transfer. Thus, 30

whenever possible, horizontal loading should be resisted by shear or core walls making the structure a 'no-sway' frame. 1) Edge columns have limited moment transfer capacity 2) Internal columns resist most of the moment, but this reduce the shear capacity of the adjacent slab 3) Holes in the slab close to a column and in the plane of bending drastically reduce the moment transfer capacity.

Due to this reason, the lift core was proposed to be converted as a shear wall (Figure 52 - yellow boxes). Initially the staircase RC walls were suggested to be replaced with shear walls in order to obtain more uniform distribution of lateral stiffness, but apparently the idea was not feasible as there are windows at the staircase that might interrupt the structures.

Figure .17: Proposed shear wall locations 3

Reference:

BS 6399 Part 2: Code of practice for wind loads

Notional horizontal load All buildings should be capable of resisting a notional design ultimate horizontal load applied at each floor or roof level simultaneously equal to 1.5 % of the characteristic dead weight of the structure between mid-height of the storey below and either mid-height of the storey above or the roof surface [i.e. the design ultimate wind load should not be taken as less than this value when considering load combinations 2 or 3.

31

According to BS 6399, it is mentioned that all buildings should be capable of resisting a notional design ultimate horizontal load which is equivalent to 1.5 % of the characteristic dead weight. This is not a compulsory requirement for building less than 10 storeys, but we carried out the analysis by using ETABS to analyze the lateral deflection based on 1.5 % of the building dead loads (Figure 53). The deflection diagram shows that the lateral drift is approximately 46mm, which is below the lateral deflection limit as specified in the code (Figure 55).

Figure .18: Checking of lateral deflection through ETABS (Finite Element Method) 3

Figure .19: Lateral deflection of the building 3

32

Figure .20: Lateral deflection diagram of the building 3 Risk assessment 2: Precautions Against Progressive Collapse - Bottom Reinforcement at Joints

Reference: Report 1989

Behavior of Reinforced Concrete Flat Slab, P.E. Regan, CIRIA

As a precaution against progressive collapse occurring as a result of a punching failure at a slab/column joint, and the consequent increases of shear and unbalanced moments at neighboring joints, some bottom reinforcement should be provided at all joints. It is suggested that the amount of reinforcement be determined by the condition that:

In order to mitigate the risk against progressive collapse, we have provided bottom reinforcement at all joints, especially the connection between RC slab and column. As shown in the drawing, the bottom reinforcement bars should span in both X and Y directions:

33

Figure .21: Typical RC slab & column connection details 3

Risk assessment 3: Safeguarding of Vertical Elements Against Vehicular Impact Reference: BS 8110

Safeguarding against vehicular impact Where vertical elements are particularly at risk from vehicle impact, consideration should be given to the provision of additional protection, such as bollards, earth banks or other devices The RC columns at the car porch are exposed to the risks of vehicular impact, which might lead to the collapse of the slab, therefore addition protection such as structural column protectors should be provided (Figure 57).

34

3.6. Detailed Design of Beams System


3.6.1. Introduction of Minimal Beams at the Building For the beams design, there are a very minimal number of beams at the top roof and level two car porch due to the flat slab system (Figure 58). Based on the beam moment and shear diagram generated by SAFE (Figure 59 and 60), the designs and detailing were carried out in accordance to BS 8110.

Figure .22: Location of RC Beams 3

General Design Considerations and Detailing - RC Beams:

Based on BS 8110 Simplified Rules:

1) Minimum areas of shear reinforcement in beam - Table in BS code of practice 2) Minimum areas of compression reinforcement for rectangular beam = 0.2% total areas of concrete 3) Minimum areas of tension reinforcement for rectangular beam = 0.13% total areas of concrete 4) Maximum tension/compression reinforcement = 4% gross cross-section concrete 5) Minimum bar size = T12

35

6) Beams whose depth 750mm or more should be provided with side lacers maximum 250mm spacing 7) Maximum amount of reinforcement in a layer including tension laps. At laps, the total diameter of all reinforcement provided in a particular layer should not exceed 40% the breadth of the section at the level. 3.6.2. Manual Design Calculations Design of RC Beams based on: Refer to the attached CD. 3.6.3. Design summary Based on the design, the final beam sizes were determined to be 200 x 500mm RC rectangular beams, while steel beams were employed at level 2 car porches, as shown below. The diagram below shows the detailed drawing of RC beams and steel beam, including the reinforcement for tension and compression bars.

Figure .23: Detailed drawing of beams design 3 The typical details for RC beams connection to the columns are illustrated below, which shows the anchorage length. 3.6.4. Risk Assessment and Special Design Considerations

Risk assessment 1: Corrosion Resistance The risks associated with RC column-to-steel beam connection mainly come from the seismic loading, which is not applicable in our design. However, the steel beams

36

supporting the car porch are exposed to weather conditions; therefore it should be protected by a coating, for example galvanized.

3.7. Other Design Considerations


3.7.1. Design of Parapet Wall for Roof

Figure .24: Typical design of parapet wall 3 Risk assessment: Moisture penetration problems The top of a parapet wall is vulnerable to moisture penetration problems. Choosing an appropriate cap is an effective way to eliminate this condition. A variety of materials are available to cap off the wall, with limestone, terra cotta, hard-fired clay, or precast concrete preferred. These materials have thermal properties similar to those of brick and concrete masonry. 3.7.2. Design of Plinth Details A plinth is the base or platform upon which a column, pedestal, statue, monument or structure rests, it also refer to the mass topping of concrete blinding.

37

Figure .25: Typical design of plinth 3 3.7.3. Design of Lintel Details A lintel is defined as a structural horizontal block that spans the space or opening between two vertical supports. Typically above openings, a lintel is used, not a bond beam.

Figure .26: Plinth lintels details 3

Risk assessment: Construction stability Where concrete floors are to be placed onto lintel, the lintels should be supported temporarily until the floors have been completed to reduce the risk of shock loading or uneven loading of the lintels.

38

3.7.4. Staircase Design

Figure .27: Staircase design 3 3.7.5. Lift Motor Room Hosting Beam Details

Figure .28: Typical lift motor room hosting beam details 3 3.7.6. Lift Core Wall

Figure .29: Typical design of lift core wall 3

39

CHAPTER 4 SUBSTRUCTURE DESIGN

4.1. Soil Investigation


The design of a structure which is economical and safe to construct, is durable and has low maintenance costs, depends upon an adequate understanding of the nature of the ground. This understanding comes from an appreciation of the distribution of the materials in the ground, and their properties and behaviour under various influences and constraints during the construction and lifetime of the structure. An adequate and properly structured soil investigation is therefore an essential part of any civil engineering or building project (Association of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Specialists, 2004). 4.1.1. Soil Investigation Layout Total number of bore holes proposed = 5 Mackintosh probe = 13 Estimated cost = (RM 3447 x 5) + (RM139 x 13) + (RM794 x 13) = RM 19, 836 The soil investigation layout is represented in Figure 4.1 bellow.

Figure .1: Soil investigation layout. 4

40

4.1.2. Soil Strata of Proposed Site in General Based on the soil investigation report, the following is the data represented in Figure 4.2 of the soil strata:
Thickness, m Strata Description Clay with sand Depth, m 1.5 2.40 3 Very soft soil Sand with gravel 5.50 Loose soil Soil Density : Standard Penetration Test Silt with sand 8.60 Very soft soil Clay with silt 13.00 Loose soil Ground water table is found here. Sand with gravel 7.5 9 10.5 12 13.5 15 16.5 18 18.6 20 Medium dense soil Bed rock 21.50 Strong soil 21.6 24 28 50 50 50 7 0 4 1 7 9 14 16 28 40 4.5 6 7 1 0 SPT, N 2

17.40 Loose to medium dense soil Sand with clay 18.60

Figure .2: Soil strata of proposed site 4 4.1.3. Risk Assessment of Underneath Soil In determining the classification of the soil type, in this case, where the site has a layered geological stratum, the soil has to be classified according to the weakest soil type. The soil types classified here to be considered in design parameters are dark, dense, sandy and clayey. The permeability of soil is derived from the weight 41

percentage of fine fraction (fraction of particles smaller than 0.06 mm) in the soil sample (Neznal, 1995). The main disadvantage of the method is given by the fact that other factors influencing the permeability (soil moisture, density, porosity) are not taken into consideration. Furthermore, the analysis of one soil sample cannot describe a heterogeneous geological environment (Neznal, 1995). Table .1: Permeability and moisture content of soil types (Davis & Wilson, 2010) 4
Soil Texture Sand Silt Clay Permeability high low low Moisture Content low high high

The sandy layers of the soil are regarded to be non-cohesive. They have lower density and more poorly graded resulting in loosely packed, low inter-granular friction and low friction angle. There is also high liquefaction potential that may causes loss of strength controlled by a combination of low density, degree of saturation and poor gradation. The higher permeability of sandy soil is undesirable for water containment structure. The clayey soil underneath are soft and finer. It is over cohesive with presence of water. There is a high risk of settlement for building, thus precautions have to be taken into account in designing the foundation type. However, the softness of the soil makes it easy for jack-in pile penetration for foundation. This layer also has a low unconfined compressive strength, making the use of jack-in piles further compressing the soft clay towards unbearable capacity.

4.2. Foundation
4.2.1. Type of Foundation Type of foundation used for the project is deep foundation. The site contains very soft clay, very soft silt and loose sand at depth 0 to 16m. In addition, ground water table found at depth of 13m and bedrock layer found at depth of 19m. The loadings from structures will rest on bedrock (SPT=50) with 4m as socket piles. Type of deep foundation used is precast spun pile. Spun piles are chosen compare with precast square RC piles because of these reasons: a. Better bending resistance b. Higher axial capacity c. Better manufacturing quality 42

d. e. f. g.

Able to sustain higher driving stresses Higher tensile capacity Easier to check integrity of piles. Similar cost to RC square piles.

The spun pile will use cross fin shoe for easy penetration to bedrock layer and reduces slipping failure when reaching the bedrock layer. Since the site near high end residential areas, method of pile installation used is hydraulics jack-in. Jacking force to penetrate the spun piles is 3800kN. Hydraulics jack-in produce lower noise, vibration and pollution compare with hammer method and bored method. It is also average in cost for both methods. Hydraulics jack-in can achieve 6 piles installation per day which is high productivity compare with common used bored piles. 4.2.2. Design of Foundation Pile section used for chosen spun pile is 500mm diameter with Fcu equivalent with 45N/mm and 10T9 reinforcement. Bearing capacity from the soil will act on surface area per length of piles and base of piles. Calculations of soil bearing capacity as follow: For Skin Friction, Fs Fs = k x SPT Where k = 2N/mm Skin Resistance, Qs Qs = Fs x As Where As is the pile surface area For Base Resistance; Using Meyerhof method Base friction, Fb Fb = (40NSPT) Lb /B < 400NSPT Where NSPT is the average uncorrected blows count within 10B above and the 4B below the pile base. Lb is the depth of penetration of pile tip into the bedrock layer. Ultimate Base Resistance, Qb Qb = Fb x Ab Where Ab is area of pile's base Allowable Pile Load, Qall Qall = (Qs + Qb) / FS Where Factor of Safety, FS = 2.5 Structural Capacity of Pile, Qst Qst = 0.25 fcu x A 43

Detail calculations for soil bearing capacity as in Appendix 3.1: Soil bearing capacity in the folder named Substructure design on the attached CD. 4.2.3. Piling Layout Summary of piles groups as shown in table 4.1 below: Table .2: piles groups 4
Piles Group 1 Pile 2 Piles Quantity 48 29 Piles Group 3 Piles 4 Piles Quantity 10 12 Piles Group 5 Piles 6 Piles Quantity 4 7

Unfactored load at column Allowable pile load Where allowable pile load calculated = 1163kN Number of piles per column = Calculation of piles per column as in Appendix 3.2: Number of piles per columns in the folder named Substructure design on the attached CD. Piling layout for spun pile foundation as Figure 4.3 below:

Figure .3: Piling layout 4

44

Spun pile details

Figure .4: Spun pile detailing 4

Figure .5: Cross pin pile shoe detailing 4 4.2.4. Risk Assessment of Foundation Pile tilt and move in soft ground Pile installation using hydraulics jack-in should reduce the risk of pile tilt while driven into the soil compare with hammer installation method. Verticality of piles should be checked before and after applying jacking forces. This method also prevent pile heave due to pressure relief. Irregular bedrock profile Irregular bedrock layer profiles will cause piles slip when hitting hard layer. Using cross pin pile shoes as recommended should encounter such risk. 45

Integrity of piles Integrity on piles group should be checked in pile group efficiently calculations. It is also will be checked by piles load test after installation on piles in group. Settlement of piles Settlement of piles will occur due to negative skin friction from soil. Piles will allow to settle and settlement after applying load test should be monitor. Failure due to installation Handling of piles from transportation to installation of piles should be checked by site engineer. Selection of pile installation contractor having more experience should be considered.

4.3. Piles Cap


4.3.1. Design of Piles Cap Refer to Figure 4.4 for illustration. Mx, My = Moment about axis x and y 2l at least 2D of pile t at least 150mm Max pile load = TL / 4 + My/2l + Mx/2l Min pile load = TL / 4 - My/2l - Mx/2l Total axial load (TL) = P + Wpilecap Where; P = Axial load in column Wpilecap = Self weight of pile cap

Figure .6: Typical pile cap 4

46

Longitudinal reinforcement (using bending method); Moment at face of the column, Mf Mf = 2 x Max pile load (l - c/2) Area of reinforcement, As As = Mf / 0.95fyz Beam shear: Shear at critical section, V V = 2 x Max pile load Stress at critical section, v v = V/Bd < 0.8 fcu Enhanced resistance = 2dvc/av Where vc = Design concrete sheer stress (Table 3.8:BS8110) and av = l/2 Punching; Stress at column perimeter = P / (2d)(c1+c2) < 0.8 fcu Stress at critical perimeter = P / (4d)(2l-B) < 0.8 fcu Detail design of all pile cap types are in Appendix 3.3: Pile cap calculation in the folder named Substructure design on the attached CD. 4.3.2. Pile Cap Details

Figure .7: Single pile cap detailing 4

47

Figure .8: Double piles cap detailing 4

Figure .9: Three piles cap detailing 4

Figure .10: Four piles cap detailing 4

48

Figure .11: Five piles cap detailing 4

Figure .12: Six piles cap detailing 4 4.3.3. Assessment of Pile Cap Shear failure and punching failure in pile cap Shear and punching failure should be checked and provide sufficient reinforcement bars. Eccentric loads from axial column Columns should be checked for verticality during construction. A very small angle change in verticality at level 1 columns will have greater affect to top most columns. Pressure from soil to bottom of pile cap Formwork installation for pile cap should have 50mm clearance from soil surface. Installation of polystyrene should be considered as gap between soil and formwork.

49

4.4. Ground Slabs


4.4.1. Typical design for ground slabs Design using Horizontal Structural Elements (RC Slab SAFE Modeling), slab properties as follows: Slab Properties: 275mm thickness Beam Properties: Non Wall Supports: RC walls thickness 200mm

General Properties; Modulus of elasticity: 27 kN/mm Poisson ratio: 0.2 RC Unit weight: 24 kN/m Concrete cover: 40 mm Concrete strength: 35 N/mm Reinforcing yield stress: 460 N/mm Loading Schedule: Dead load: 24 kN/m (Self weight of RC slabs, columns and beams) Live load: 3.0 kN/m (BS 6399: Part 1 - Normal functions) Superimposed dead load (SDL): 1.0 kN/m (Brick wall partitions + screed/finishes) Special case load (SDL): 30 kN/m (TNB substation and ground tank) and 7.5 kN/m (M&E - Assumptions w/o specifications) Slab Reinforcement Bars: Consider per meter strip using BS 8110; Minimum Reinforcement 0.13% bh = 0.13 % x 1000mm x 300 mm (max. slab thickness) = 390.0 mm Provide T12 @ 200 for basic rebar = 565.0 mm

50

CHAPTER 5 MATERIALS QUANTITIES AND ECONOMICS

5.1. Concrete Price and Calculations


Based on the report produced by Construction Industry Development Board (January and February Edition), the rates and prices of materials are obtained. The price of concrete for slab, beam and columns are shown in Tables 5.1 below. For more details refer to the folder name Materials quantities and economics in the attached CD. Table .1: Rate of ready mix concrete 5

5.1.1. Calculation for Slabs Concrete Costing Calculation for slab costing is summarised in Table 5.2 bellow. Table .2: Calculation for slabs concrete costing 5

51

5.1.2. Calculation for Beams Concrete Costing Calculation for beam costing is summarised in Table 5.3 bellow. Table .3: Calculation for beams concrete costing 5

5.1.3. Calculation for ColumnsConcrete Costing Calculation for column costing is summarised in Table 5.4 bellow. Table .4: Calculation for columns concrete costing 5

52

Table 5.4: Calculation for columns concrete costing (continued)

5.1.4. Calculation for Reinforced Concrete StaircasessConcrete Coasting Calculation for staircases costing is summarised in Table 5.5 bellow. Table .5: Calculation for staircases concrete costing 5

5.1.5. Calculation for Reinforced Concrete Sheer WallsConcrete Coasting Calculation for sheer wall costing is summarised in Table 5.6 bellow. Table .6: Calculation for sheer walls concrete costing 5

53

5.2. Steel Price and Calculations


The calculation for the price of steel for slab, beam and columns are shown in the tables below. 5.2.1. Calculation for RC SlabsSteel Coasting Calculation for RC slabs steel costing is summarised in Table 5.7 bellow. Table .7: Calculation for RC slabs steel costing 5

5.2.2. Calculation for Reinforced Concrete BeamsSteel Coasting Calculation for reinforced concrete beams steel costing is summarised in Table 5.8 bellow. Table .8: Calculation for reinforced concrete beams steel costing 5

5.2.3. Calculation for Universal Beam Coasting Calculation for universal beam coasting is summarised in Table 5.9 bellow.

54

Table .9: Calculation for Universal Beam Coasting 5


Level Number of Beam Cross Sectional Area (m ) 2 3 533 x 210 x 101 UB 0.0129
2

Beam Size

Average Beam Length (m) 11.4

Rate (RM/m) 353.68

Price of UB

RM12,095.86

5.2.4. Calculation for RC ColumnsSteel Coasting (Main Rebar) Calculation for RC columns steel coasting is summarised in Table 5.10 bellow. Table .10: Calculation for RC columns steel coasting (Main rebar) 5
Level Top Roof Column height (m) 3 Column size Num. of Column Main Rebar Length of rebar (m) 564 216 0 0 0 592 768 0 0 0 464 1104 48 0 0 416 1104 192 0 0 352 816 720 0 0 480 1056 864 64 0 464 1536 768 256 0 Rate (RM/m) 14.91 9.10 14.91 14.91 14.91 14.91 9.10 14.91 14.91 14.91 14.91 9.10 14.91 14.91 14.91 14.91 9.10 14.91 14.91 14.91 14.91 9.10 14.91 14.91 14.91 14.91 9.10 14.91 14.91 14.91 14.91 9.10 14.91 14.91 14.91 Price of Main Rebar

250 x 250 325 x 325 400 x 400 500 x 500 550 x 550 250 x 250 325 x 325 400 x 400 500 x 500 550 x 550 250 x 250 325 x 325 400 x 400 500 x 500 550 x 550 250 x 250 325 x 325 400 x 400 500 x 500 550 x 550 250 x 250 325 x 325 400 x 400 500 x 500 550 x 550 250 x 250 325 x 325 400 x 400 500 x 500 550 x 550 250 x 250 325 x 325 400 x 400 500 x 500 550 x 550

47 6 0 0 0 37 16 0 0 0 29 23 1 0 0 26 23 4 0 0 22 17 15 0 0 30 22 18 1 0 29 32 16 4 0

4T32 12T25 12T32 16T32 32T32 4T32 12T25 12T32 16T32 32T32 4T32 12T25 12T32 16T32 32T32 4T32 12T25 12T32 16T32 32T32 4T32 12T25 12T32 16T32 32T32 4T32 12T25 12T32 16T32 32T32 4T32 12T25 12T32 16T32 32T32

RM8,409.24 RM1,965.60 RM0.00 RM0.00 RM0.00 RM8,826.72 RM6,988.80 RM0.00 RM0.00 RM0.00 RM6,918.24 RM10,046.40 RM715.68 RM0.00 RM0.00 RM6,202.56 RM10,046.40 RM2,862.72 RM0.00 RM0.00 RM5,248.32 RM7,425.60 RM10,735.20 RM0.00 RM0.00 RM7,156.80 RM9,609.60 RM12,882.24 RM954.24 RM0.00 RM6,918.24 RM13,977.60 RM11,450.88 RM3,816.96 RM0.00

55

Level 2

Column height (m) 4.2

Column size 250 x 250 325 x 325 400 x 400 500 x 500 550 x 550 250 x 250 325 x 325 400 x 400 500 x 500 550 x 550

Num. of Column 44 34 12 11 1 36 33 16 13 4 622

Main Rebar 4T32 12T25 12T32 16T32 32T32 4T32 12T25 12T32 16T32 32T32

5.2

Length of rebar (m) 739.2 1713.6 604.8 739.2 134.4 748.8 2059.2 998.4 1081.6 665.6

Rate (RM/m) 14.91 9.10 14.91 14.91 14.91 14.91 9.10 14.91 14.91 14.91

Price of Main Rebar RM11,021.47 RM15,593.76 RM9,017.57 RM11,021.47 RM2,003.90 RM11,164.61 RM18,738.72 RM14,886.14 RM16,126.66 RM9,924.10 RM272,656.44

Total

36.4

5.2.5. Calculation for RC ColumnsSteel Coasting (Links) Calculation for RC columns steel coasting is summarised in Table 5.11 bellow. Table .11: Calculation for RC columns steel coasting (Links) 5
Level Column height (meter) 3 Column size 250 x 250 325 x 325 400 x 400 500 x 500 550 x 550 250 x 250 325 x 325 400 x 400 500 x 500 550 x 550 250 x 250 325 x 325 400 x 400 500 x 500 550 x 550 250 x 250 325 x 325 400 x 400 500 x 500 550 x 550 250 x 250 325 x 325 400 x 400 500 x 500 550 x 550 250 x 250 325 x 325 400 x 400 500 x 500 550 x 550 Num. of Column 47 6 0 0 0 37 16 0 0 0 29 23 1 0 0 26 23 4 0 0 22 17 15 0 0 30 22 18 1 0 Links R10-300 R10-300 R10-300 R10-300 R10-300 R10-300 R10-300 R10-300 R10-300 R10-300 R10-300 R10-300 R10-300 R10-300 R10-300 R10-300 R10-300 R10-300 R10-300 R10-300 R10-300 R10-300 R10-300 R10-300 R10-300 R10-300 R10-300 R10-300 R10-300 R10-300 Length Rate of links (meter) (RM/m) 351.56 1.60 64.68 1.60 0 1.60 0 1.60 0 1.60 377.4 1.60 235.2 1.60 0 1.60 0 1.60 0 1.60 295.8 1.60 338.1 1.60 19.2 1.60 0 1.60 0 1.60 265.2 1.60 338.1 1.60 76.8 1.60 0 1.60 0 1.60 224.4 1.60 249.9 1.60 288 1.60 0 1.60 0 1.60 306 1.60 323.4 1.60 345.6 1.60 25.2 1.60 0 1.60 Price of Links RM562.50 RM103.49 RM0.00 RM0.00 RM0.00 RM603.84 RM376.32 RM0.00 RM0.00 RM0.00 RM473.28 RM540.96 RM30.72 RM0.00 RM0.00 RM424.32 RM540.96 RM122.88 RM0.00 RM0.00 RM359.04 RM399.84 RM460.80 RM0.00 RM0.00 RM489.60 RM517.44 RM552.96 RM40.32 RM0.00

Top Roof

56

Level 3

Column height 4

4.2

5.2

Column size 250 x 250 325 x 325 400 x 400 500 x 500 550 x 550 250 x 250 325 x 325 400 x 400 500 x 500 550 x 550 250 x 250 325 x 325 400 x 400 500 x 500 550 x 550

Total

36.4

Num. of Column 29 32 16 4 0 44 34 12 11 1 36 33 16 13 4 622

Links R10-300 R10-300 R10-300 R10-300 R10-300 R10-300 R10-300 R10-300 R10-300 R10-300 R10-300 R10-300 R10-300 R10-300 R10-300

Length of links 295.8 470.4 307.2 100.8 0 448.8 499.8 230.4 277.2 28.2 465.12 614.46 389.12 414.96 142.88

Rate 1.60 1.60 1.60 1.60 1.60 1.60 1.60 1.60 1.60 1.60 1.60 1.60 1.60 1.60 1.60

Price of Links RM473.28 RM752.64 RM491.52 RM161.28 RM0.00 RM718.08 RM799.68 RM368.64 RM443.52 RM45.12 RM744.19 RM983.14 RM622.59 RM663.94 RM228.61 RM14,095.49

5.2.6. Calculation for RC ColumnsSteel Coasting (Hooks) Calculation for RC columns steel coasting is summarised in Table 5.12 bellow. Table .12: Calculation for RC columns steel coasting (Hooks) 5
Level Column height (meter) 3 Column size 250 325 400 500 550 250 325 400 500 550 250 325 400 500 550 250 325 400 500 550 250 325 400 500 550 250 325 400 500 550 x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x 250 325 400 500 550 250 325 400 500 550 250 325 400 500 550 250 325 400 500 550 250 325 400 500 550 250 325 400 500 550 Num. of Column 47 6 0 0 0 37 16 0 0 0 29 23 1 0 0 26 23 4 0 0 22 17 15 0 0 30 22 18 1 0 Hooks N/A 4T10-300 4T10-300 2T10-300 6T10-300 N/A 4T10-300 4T10-300 2T10-300 6T10-300 N/A 4T10-300 4T10-300 2T10-300 6T10-300 N/A 4T10-300 4T10-300 2T10-300 6T10-300 N/A 4T10-300 4T10-300 2T10-300 6T10-300 N/A 4T10-300 4T10-300 2T10-300 6T10-300 Length of hooks (meter) 0 64.68 0 0 0 0 235.2 0 0 0 0 338.1 19.2 0 0 0 338.1 76.8 0 0 0 249.9 288 0 0 0 323.4 345.6 12.6 0 Rate (RM/m) 1.55 1.55 1.55 1.55 1.55 1.55 1.55 1.55 1.55 1.55 1.55 1.55 1.55 1.55 1.55 1.55 1.55 1.55 1.55 1.55 1.55 1.55 1.55 1.55 1.55 1.55 1.55 1.55 1.55 1.55 Price of Hooks RM0.00 RM100.25 RM0.00 RM0.00 RM0.00 RM0.00 RM364.56 RM0.00 RM0.00 RM0.00 RM0.00 RM524.06 RM29.76 RM0.00 RM0.00 RM0.00 RM524.06 RM119.04 RM0.00 RM0.00 RM0.00 RM387.35 RM446.40 RM0.00 RM0.00 RM0.00 RM501.27 RM535.68 RM19.53 RM0.00

Top Roof

57

Level 3

Column height 4

4.2

5.2

Column size 250 x 250 325 x 325 400 x 400 500 x 500 550 x 550 250 x 250 325 x 325 400 x 400 500 x 500 550 x 550 250 x 250 325 x 325 400 x 400 500 x 500 550 x 550

Total

36.4

Num. of Column 29 32 16 4 0 44 34 12 11 1 36 33 16 13 4 622

Hooks N/A 4T10-300 4T10-300 2T10-300 6T10-300 N/A 4T10-300 4T10-300 2T10-300 6T10-300 N/A 4T10-300 4T10-300 2T10-300 6T10-300

Length of hooks 0 470.4 307.2 50.4 0 0 499.8 230.4 138.6 42.3 0 614.46 389.12 207.48 214.32

Rate 1.55 1.55 1.55 1.55 1.55 1.55 1.55 1.55 1.55 1.55 1.55 1.55 1.55 1.55 1.55

Price of Hooks RM0.00 RM729.12 RM476.16 RM78.12 RM0.00 RM0.00 RM774.69 RM357.12 RM214.83 RM65.57 RM0.00 RM952.41 RM603.14 RM321.59 RM332.20 RM8,456.89

5.2.7. Calculation for RC ColumnsSteel Coasting (Total) Calculation for RC columns steel coasting is summarised in Table 5.13 bellow. Table .13: Calculation for RC columns steel coasting (Total) 5 Level TOP ROOF 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 TOTAL Cost (RM) RM11,141.08 RM17,160.24 RM19,279.10 RM20,842.94 RM25,462.55 RM33,259.68 RM39,325.80 RM52,445.42 RM76,292.03 RM295,208.82

5.2.8. Calculation for StaircasesSteel Coasting Calculation for RC Staircases steel coasting is summarised in Table 5.14 bellow. Table .14: Calculation for RC staircases steel coasting 5
Level Top Roof 8 Main rebar T10 T12 T10 T12 Number of units 22 96 22 96 Length of rebar (meter) 396 576 396 576 Rate (RM/m) 1.55 2.23 1.55 2.23 Price of steel RM613.80 RM1,284.48 RM613.80 RM1,284.48

58

Level

Main rebar T10 T12 T10 T12 T10 T12 T10 T12 T10 T12 T10 T12 T10 T12

Number of units 22 96 22 96 22 96 22 96 22 96 22 96 22 96 1062

7 6 5 4 3 2 1 Total

Length of rebar (meter) 396 576 396 576 396 576 396 576 396 576 396 576 396 576 6372

Rate (RM/m) 1.55 2.23 1.55 2.23 1.55 2.23 1.55 2.23 1.55 2.23 1.55 2.23 1.55 2.23

Price of steel RM613.80 RM1,284.48 RM613.80 RM1,284.48 RM613.80 RM1,284.48 RM613.80 RM1,284.48 RM613.80 RM1,284.48 RM613.80 RM1,284.48 RM613.80 RM1,284.48 RM17,084.52

5.2.9. Calculation for Shear WallsSteel Coasting Calculation for shear walls steel coasting is summarised in Table 5.15 bellow. Table .15: Calculation for shear walls steel coasting 5
Shear Wall Main Rebar / Links Length (meter) Horizontal bars - T10 Vertical bars - T12 Dirty Lift Links - R6 Horizontal bars - T10 Vertical bars - T12 Lift 1,2 & 3 Links - R6 Horizontal bars - T10 Vertical bars - T12 Lift 4,5 & 6 Total Links - R6 13 38 0.25 25 38 0.25 25 38 0.25 366 132 3003 366 250 5733 366 250 5733 Number of Units Length of rebar (meter) 4758 5016 750.75 9150 9500 1433.25 9150 9500 1433.25 40917.25 Rates (RM/m) 1.55 2.23 0.56 1.55 2.23 0.56 1.55 2.23 0.56 RM7,374.90 RM11,185.68 RM420.42 RM14,182.50 RM21,185.00 RM802.62 RM14,182.50 RM21,185.00 RM802.62 RM91,321.24 Price of steel

5.3. Pile Caps Price and Calculations


The calculation for the price of pile caps are shown in Table 5.16.

59

Table .16: Pile caps price and calculations 5


PILE GROUP 2 piles 3 piles 4 piles 5 piles 12 piles 15 piles TOTAL CONCRETE (RM) RM24,300.13 RM5,996.02 RM9,156.57 RM10,190.83 RM10,057.33 RM12,800.24 RM72,501.12 STEEL (RM) RM28,915.97 RM5,700.25 RM9,215.46 RM14,321.06 RM14,453.81 RM17,848.68 RM90,455.23

5.4. Total Cost of Materials


The summary of the cost is represented in Table 5.17 bellow. Element Concrete (superstructure) Steel (superstructure) Concrete (pile caps) Steel (pile caps) Spun piles Total Price (RM) RM1,133,693.11 RM 834,849.18 RM72,501.12 RM90,455.23 RM1,483,399.00 RM 3,614,897.64

60

You might also like