Available Amenities

1. Electricity
Electricity for the entire airport and surroundings will be provided by the Trinidad and
Tobago Electricity Commission (T&TEC).
2. Water Supply
It is expected that part of the daily domestic water requirement for the entire facility will
be provided through municipal mains supply from the Water and Sewerage Authority
(WASA). If the supplier is unable to maintain the daily supply it is recommended that 4
tube wells be inserted into the complex to provide the domestic water requirement on
need basis.
3. Waste Water Treatment
The estimated amount of waste water flow is approximately 2500m3/day from the entire
facility. This effluent will be discharged into the effluent and sewage treatment plants
which will be located in the vicinity of the airport. The plants will be managed and
operated by SWMCOL.
Effluent Treatment Plant
The effluent treatment plant shall have a capacity of approximately 1500m3/day and the
quality of the treated effluents shall be of a quality suitable for re-use as flushing water in
the WCs.
Sewage Treatment Plant
The sewage treatment plant shall have a capacity of 1300m3/day and the quality of the
treated effluent shall be suitable for re-use water in the cooling towers of the air
conditioning systems as well as for use in horticulture activities. It is also proposed to use
activated sludge process based o the principle of extended aeration based on a Diffused
Aeration System.
4. Telecommunications and Satellite Services.
Telecommunications will be provided by the Telecommunication Services of Trinidad
and Tobago. Satellite services will be provided by VSAT and Satellite Technologies.
5. Fire Services

6. Police Services.

Conceptual Design

Conceptual design in civil engineering refers to a vague and creative phase at the
beginning of the construction process. In the later phases of a project, only a small part of the
building is under elaboration whereas in conceptual design the entire building, its functionality
and usage are all taken into consideration. The purpose of a conceptual design is to determine the
most feasible alternative. At this stage the objective is to study a number of possible schemes and
select the most cost effective one. To determine this, detailed calculations are unnecessary
however member sizes and reinforcement content must be estimated in order to determine the
relative amounts of materials which will then determine the cost of the project.
The conceptual design of any project must consider the intended functionality of the
structure so that there is no ambiguity concerning the function which the end product must serve.
Based on the given design brief, the design of the airport terminal and control tower must fulfil
the wishes of the client which are to provide a unique, safe and feasible structure to
accommodate the growing economy and to improve transport links. The client also wishes that
the airport be seen as a reflection of the nation and that they both display outstanding design
qualities. Economy must also be maintained since the airport proposal must set new standards in
cost effectiveness and quality.
For this conceptual design a number of alternatives were created for each structure. This
was done by a combination of research and sketches producing a number of possible ideas. Each
member of the group produced an individual concept for the terminal as well as the control
tower. From this, sketches were produced combining a number of ideas and possibilities. From
the different ideas and possibilities generated, each alternative was passed through a design
matrix and from this the most feasible option was chosen for a terminal and control tower. The
entire airport facility should encompass:
i.
ii.
iii.
iv.
v.
vi.
vii.
viii.

Main terminal building

Transport interchange facilities
Runways
Car parks
Control tower
Water and waste management facilities
Aircraft maintenance
Future passenger terminal expansion
All of the above were taken into consideration for each conceptual design.

Preliminary design
The preliminary design phase is the phase in which high level design concepts are generated. The
objective of the preliminary design is to map out how the structure will perform the functions
specified in the requirements. The main activities for the preliminary design phase are:
i.
ii.
iii.

Create a high level design description

Identify the major components of the structure
Include reliability, maintenance and tests features that are necessary to meet the

iv.

performance and quality requirements

Identify constraints on the structure that are a result of high level design.

Method of Selection of Alternatives

To determine the most feasible alternative for the airport terminal as well as the control tower a
Design matrix was configured. To develop this rational method for selection of the final
alternative, key influential factors were identified and evaluated thoroughly to determine their
impact on the final choice. The main and most crucial factors which were selected for this matrix
were as follows:
i.

Performance

ii.
iii.
iv.
v.
vi.
vii.

Costs
Constructability
Accessibility
Environmental impact
Safety
Aesthetics.

Performance
The performance criterion will be used to assess the variances in the client and stakeholders
demand satisfaction for each alternative. It will qualitatively assess whether or not the demands
of the affected parties were abundantly satisfied. The airport terminal must provide a reasonable
financial return to the stakeholders as well as provide efficient passenger services. Future
expansion of the terminal also falls under this category. Some key factors which are to be used
for the determination of performance of the best terminal are:
i.
ii.
iii.
iv.
v.
vi.
vii.
viii.

Passenger flow
Level of service for passengers
Performance standards
Walking distance
Traffic peaking characteristics
Future growth
Ease of way-finding
Retail

Costs
This includes capital, operation and maintenance costs. For any preliminary design the major
objective is to determine the most feasible alternative. This will be dependent on the cost of the
structure. The capital costs are the total costs which are needed to implement the project and may
be considered as the costs incurred on the purchase of construction to be used in the rendering of
services.
Operation costs are the recurring expenses which are related to the operation of the facility while
maintenance costs result from actually maintaining the facility. From this, the overall cost of the
entire structure for both terminal and control tower will be determined for each alternative and
based on this criterion, the best one will be chosen.

Constructability
This may be defined as the optimum use of knowledge and experience in designing, planning
and field operations to achieve the overall objectives of the project. Ares under consideration for
this are, simplicity, ease of construction, economy and statutory restrictions. Careful attention
must be paid to in this criterion since economy plays a heavy role as well as ease and speed of
construction of the project. In order to determine the best alternative based on this criterion, the
costing of each structure was determined as well a project schedule. The most feasible will then
be chosen.

Circulation or Accessibility
This refers to the ease with which passengers and vehicular traffic can flow into, out of and
within the facility. Each alternative will be assessed based on:
i.
ii.

Movement through the structure/ structures with the differently capable in mind.
Provision for vehicular traffic flow around the facility at entrances and exits as well as

iii.
iv.
v.
vi.

flow into and out of the facility.

Zoning layout that provides ease of access between terminal element and control tower.
Provisions for aircraft and machinery mobility around and about the concourse areas.
Provisions for movement and transport of cargo within the facility.
Proper and adequate parking facilities.

Environmental Impact
Environmental considerations such as effect on wildlife ecology, ground water runoff, air
pollution as well waste water management systems all fall under this criterion. Ecological
impacts may be a result of poor construction practice and induced development by the presence
of the airport and hotels. Careful disposal of waste, waste water handling and re-use must also
be heavily considered so that nearby existing water bearing zones will not become polluted. For
this design a waste water treatment facility is to be implemented. An adequate water distribution
system must also be implemented for the entire facility.

Sites near bird habitats must also be avoided since there are many previous accidents involving
birds colliding with airplanes as well as ingestion into jet engines.

Safety
For this criterion the layout of each structure is critical. This means that the building must be
designed to accommodate large volumes of human traffic. The building must be carefully
assessed for earthquake resistant design, wind and hurricane design as well as fire design. To
determine this, careful analysis for earthquake and wind loading must be done in detail in
accordance with the relevant codes and standards. Each component of the structure must comply
with the required standards for fire resistant design. The type of glass sheeting and proper
bracing must also be heavily considered.

Aesthetics
This is the most subjective criterion considered for the selection of the final alternative since it
relies on the ability to discriminate at a sensory level. Considerations will be given to how each
alternative meets the wishes of the client and how each alternative blends with the environment.
Since the client wishes that the airport terminal and control tower be a representation of the
nation as well depict a Gateway to the sky, the model which best suits this description will be
considered.

Selection models
Criteria consideration rating of alternatives
Based on the aforementioned selection criteria, several selection models were developed and
compared based on their weaknesses and strengths. To determine the most feasible alternative
from all five alternatives, it was agreed that two basic models will be used one of a qualitative
and quantitative measure.

Holistic approach
This model was used to rate the three alternatives under each criterion using a consideration
index. This consideration index, rated each alternative based on their level of consideration
towards the criterion. The consideration index is as follows:
i.

High consideration (H) alternative reflects a high level of consideration

ii.

Moderate consideration (M) - reflects a moderate level of consideration towards criterion.

iii.

Low consideration (L) reflects a low level of consideration towards criterion.

Each alternative was severely critiqued and from this, Table...... below was produced giving a
model which employs a qualitative approach. The design alternative which gives the highest
consideration to criteria will be selected.

CONSIDERATION SELECTION MODEL - QUALITATIVE

APPROACH
TERMINAL BUILDING
Performance
Environmental Impact
Costs (capital, operation and maintenance costs)
Constructability
Circulation (movement around site)
Safety
Aesthetics

Concrete
Alternativ
e1
H

Steel
Alternativ
e2
H

M
M
H
M
M

H
H
H
M
L

TOWER

Concrete

Steel

Performance
Environmental Impact
Costs (capital, operation and maintenance costs)
Constructability
Circulation (movement around site)
Safety
Aesthetics

From the table above it can be seen that the holistic design approach of
alternative............ gave the most consideration to the selection criteria making it the
most suitable option.

Weakness of model and recommendations

More suitable for rapid evaluations and there is the possibility of the same final
result
Since little emphasis is placed in the detailing of each criterion, the index can
misrepresent the individual effects as opposed to an overall effect.
Index allocation is based highly on emotions versus scientific research.

Recommendations for improvement of model

Each of the selection criteria in the above table may be sub divided into sub criteria so
that they will be more specific to a particular area of the main criteria. This would
require less guess work and more precise answers.

Total Weighting Approach

For this approach each criterion was marked based on the importance to the provision
of the terminal and control tower. Each criterion was assigned a relative weighting
factor which then determined the weight of that particular criterion. This was done for

all the criteria for each alternative and the total weighted score for each alternative was
tallied. The ranking is as follows and it should be noted that the criterion with the
highest ranking is of the greatest importance. One major weakness of this model is that
the ranking is still based on emotion rather than scientific approaches.
Ranking Values
0

No relation

Totally incompatible

Very unsatisfactory

No satisfaction

Poor satisfaction

Moderate satisfaction

Average satisfaction

Good satisfaction

Excellent satisfaction

The ranking values were t hen distributed on the basis of the main objective, that is, the
economical development of a high performance environmentally friendly airport facility. A
weighting factor of 0-4 stems unsatisfactory results whereas from 5-8 shows ranges of high
satisfaction. Table........... shows the distribution of the weighting factors for each alternative
below.

TOTAL WEIGHTING SELECTION MODEL - QUANTITATIVE

APPROACH
TERMINAL BUILDING

DESIGN CRITERIA

Alternati
ve 1

Alternativ
e2

Ranking

Alternati
ve 1

Alternativ
e2

Ranking

Performance
Environmental Impact
Costs (capital, operation and maintenance costs)
Constructability
Circulation (movement around site)
Safety
Aesthetics

TOWER

DESIGN CRITERIA

Performance
Environmental Impact
Costs (capital, operation and maintenance costs)
Constructability
Circulation (movement around site)
Safety
Aesthetics

The total weighting for each alternative was calculated by summing the products of the
weighting and ranking for each criterion for that particular alternative.

Allocation of weighting
Terminal
Performance
Alternative..... showed the highest levels of performance also taking into account room for future
performance.

Capital costs
Alternative..... was allocated the highest weighting value since it requires less capital to construct
and maintain. The building is of a simple design and very cost effective.
Constructability
The highest weighting was given to alternative..... as this option was simple to design,
economical and with desirable speeds of construction.
Circulation or Accessibility
Alternative.... .. showed the highest weighting for this criteria since the layout allows for more
accessibility and room for future expansion.
Environmental Impact
Alternative ....... was elected with the highest weighting since this showed the smallest scale of
development for the area.
Safety
For this criterion, alternative.......... was chosen. By looking at the architectural drawings we see
that this alternative provides safer surroundings and measures than alternative......
Aesthetics
Both alternatives show contrast however they both enhance the existing environment therefore
they were both given the same weighting.
From the analysis of the above results it shows that alternative..... is the most suitable option for
this preliminary design. The total weighting for this option was ...... which is not to far from the
alternative ........ Alternative ...... provides better performance for stakeholders and also leaves
adequate room for future expansion. When capital costs are compared for both structures it was
seen that alternative....... was the most cost effective option. Therefore it can be said that from the
above results alternative....... is the most feasible alternative for the clients.

The same process described above for choosing the most feasible option for the terminal was
carried out for the control tower until it was determined that alternative........ was the most
suitable alternative for the client.

Structural Analysis of the Reinforced Concrete Control

Tower
Initial sizing of structural members and other materials
The initial sizing of the beams and columns was done in accordance to the Preliminary Design
Guide of Structural Members by Richard Clarke. A detailed analysis of the total loads will be
done in the detailed design section. For this preliminary design section, the load cases considered
for this stage of design were as follows:
Dead Loads
Live Loads
Earthquake Loads

 Wind Loads

Earthquake Loading Conditions

The base shear is calculated as 10% of the total weight of the structure. For earthquake
analysis checks will be performed in the lateral and vertical sections of the building in
plan view. Point loading at each level will be distributed by looking at the relative surface
area ratios throughout the entire building since the building is not evenly distributed or
symmetrical. The figure below shows the distribution of earthquake forces on the control
tower.
From the earth analysis the period of the structure was 0.75 Hertz
The total earthquake loading was calculated to be 2057.86 KN.

Figure...... showing distribution of earthquake forces on control tower.

In the detailed design this analysis will be done using plane frame analysis. The loading
conditions considered are as follows:
1.2D + 0.5L+1.0E

 1.4D + 1.6 L
The required longitudinal and transverse steel will be calculated in the detailed design
stage.

Wind Loading Conditions

Wind loading on the control tower plays a critical part since the tower was designed as a high
rise structure. Wind loading on tall buildings needs to be considered in the early design stages so
that the size and form of the structure can be optimised to capitalise on the possibilities of
reducing the wind loads.
At a height of 52 metres high, wind velocities provide lateral forces throughout the entire length
of the building. In Trinidad the wind speed generated for design purposes is that of 45m/s. This
is critical to the building since this can cause the tower to sway immensely which can be
detrimental to the structural integrity of the tower. A regular rigid frame has its deflections
produced by bending of columns and bending of the beams. Dynamic wind loading can cause
over-turning if the restoring moment cannot counteract these forces. Figure..... below shows how
wind loading is distributed throughout the control tower.
The wind loads were calculated for each floor height of the building but the diagram below
shows a general distribution of the forces. The wind loads were calculated to produce a total
wind load of 2171.0 KN.

W4

W3

W2

W1

W0

Figure....... showing the distribution of wind loads on the structure.

Load Path Analysis

SOIL

Type of frame system

For the preliminary design of the control tower, the type of frame system chosen was critical.
Since the airport is being designed for a location in Trinidad and Tobago, the type of system
chosen had to be capable of resisting earthquakes. Since most structures are designed to resist the
vertical forces of gravity, little additional strength is needed to account for the vertical aspect of
seismic forces. However since seismic forces also impart horizontal forces, a successful
structural design must account for this additional horizontal force. Although buildings are
already designed to resist wind forces, seismic forces are typically greater than wind forces
therefore buildings require greater strength components to resist seismic forces. These
components form system called an earthquake resistant structural system.
An earthquake resistant structural system is a structural system with properties and behaviour
that area favourable towards the objective of adequately resisting earthquake forces (Clarke,
Earthquake Resistant Design n.d.)The main desiarable quality of such a structural system is
ductility. The other desirable properties which promote high ductility and overall favorable
responses are:
i.

Regularity Little change in stiffness, mass and strength from floor to floor

ii.

Continuous load path- The absence of gaps between members so that the force is
effectively transferred from each member to successive members on its way to the
foundation

iii.

Short load path- Small offsets in beams, columns and walls

iv.

Multiple Load paths the presence of several routes which the force can travel
through to the foundation means that if any one member becomes overstressed
other members can be relied upon to absorb its energy.

v.

Strong connections- to ensure that the load path is not broken by excessive
deformations or rupture.

When all these factors are maximised, the sequence and formation of hinges are such that their
energy absorption in the system is maximised. With the above mentioned, the safest and most
reliable structural system to be considered was that of a Moment Resisting Frame.

Framed Tube Structure

Framed tube structures are a special type of a moment resisting frame. They are constructed with
very wide columns closely spaced and relatively deep beams. Framed tubes have narrowly
spaced exterior columns combined with beams to form rigid structures to resist lateral loads. This
type of framing is usually located on the perimeter of the structure. Due to the added strength of
the wide columns and deep beams, this type of system introduces more stiffness. The stiffness is
used to overcome the potential problems caused by the horizontal sway which occurs during an
earthquake. The framed tube method is frequently used in very tall buildings where swaying can
be detrimental to the structural integrity of the building.
The first noted example of a framed tube structure is the Dewitt Chestnut Apartments, Chicago
Illinois constructed in 1964 as shown in Figure.... below.

Figure ..... showing Dewitt

Chestnut Apartments in

Chicago constructed using a tube frame structure.

The 43 story reinforced concrete tower was designed by Dr. Fazlur Khan at Skidmore Owings
and Merrill (SOM). Due to its high relative strength and stiffness the tubular form immediately
became a standard in high rise design (D. F. Khan 2006)

For the design of the control tower, the shaft comprises of an inner and outer shaft. The outer
shaft which models a framed tube structure has a square base with a total of eight wide columns
each 600 x 600 mm in dimension as shown in the figure... below.

Figure .................showing arrangement of columns on outer shaft.

The columns are equally and closely spaced which helps to generate the required stiffness. The
inner shaft comprises of a rectangular elevator shaft with columns placed at each corner each
column having dimensions of 300 x 300 mm. This shaft acts as a symmetrical shear core due to
the arrangement of the columns. On the outer shaft there are deep beams of dimensions 600 x
800 mm spanning between columns whereas in the inner shaft secondary beams are used to join
inner to the outer shaft for each floor. This beam and column arrangement can be seen in
figure....... which shows how this framed system caters for stiffness in the control tower.

Roof Structure
The type of roof chosen for the control tower is that of a domed structure. This was chosen since
it will mimic an arched system which is structurally sound as well it adds to the aesthetics of the
structure. The dome spans 12 metres in diameter and has a rise of 2 metres. The type of dome
chosen is that of a Ferro-cement dome. Ferro-cement is a composite of steel and cementitious
material. The large size steel reinforcing bars are replaced with wire meshes, while the coarse
aggregate is removed completely from the cementitious matrix. The resultant composite called
Ferro-cement lends itself to casting in thin sections. The properties of Ferro-cement such as
strength, water tightness light weight, durability, fire resistance and environmental stability are
hard to match. (T.P. Singh, High Performance Ferrocement Dome). The dome shell will be
designed to be 1 inch thick with 24 nos. longitudinal stiffener ribs in the form of truss frames

projecting inwards. An example of this can be seen in Figure..... below which shows the
arrangement of the reinforcement being used in the construction of the dome.

Figure..... showing reinforcement detail (Temple in Doraha, India)

Six layers of GI wire meshes will be wrapped on the armature. The truss will consist of 2-8 mm
bars connected with zig zag lattice bars. The trusses will be curved to follow the shape of the
dome. The trusses will be erected on a ring beam of size 300x400mm which will be welded on to
dowels left in the beam. At the top the trusses will be arranged and held in place by a pipe ring
which will be imbedded in the concrete. The trusses once erected will be wrapped around be
hoop steel 6mm diameter MS bars at every 3 inches.
The Ferro-cement dome shell will have 6 layers of GI wire meshes with 3 on each side. Voids in
the shell will be filled with PVC grouting nipples. This type of structure was chosen due to its
light weight which will in turn reduce the earthquake damage potential to the building. Examples
of this particular type of structure can be seen in the temples in Doraha, India built by the
Gurudwara Brahm Bunga Trust as well as off shore structures which use the improved Ferrocement techniques developed by Martin Iorns.

Reinforced Concrete Beams

Assume a ductile frame and a beam span of 6 metres
For non-cantilever, d = span/26 + 300 mm (span in mm)
= 6000/26 + 300 = 530 mm
Use 600 mm depth beams
For spans 6000mm < span < 9000mm width (b) of beam = 350 mm
From the above, use 600 x 800 mm beams in the preliminary design stage.
In the detailed design the calculation checks will include beam slenderness, span/effective depth,
reinforcement and depth of cover using the BS8110:Part 1:1997.

Reinforced Column Design

Square columns will be used for the preliminary analysis. All columns are braced columns.
On each of the 13 floors of the outer shaft 600 x600 mm square columns will be placed each
2.1 metres apart on each side.
On each floor the inner shaft 300 x 300 mm square columns will be placed at each corner of the
rectangular shaft.
On the first floor of the cab, 8 square columns of size 400 x 400mm will be used along the
perimeter of the slab.
On the second floor of the cab, 8 slanted columns projecting outwards of size 400 x 400 mm will
be arranged on the perimeter of the slab. Typical reinforcement is calculated as 4% of the gross
cross sectional area of the column. In the detailed design full reinforcement detail will be
calculated and verified using the BS8110:Part 1:1997 Structural Use of Concrete: Part 2 Code of
Practice for Design and Construction.

Floor System
The type of floor system chosen is that of a typical two-way solid slab design with beams
running underneath forming a grid like pattern. This type of floor system is simple with a typical
solid concrete slab of 6 inches thickness and diameter of 9 metres. This was also chosen since
this floor system makes use of cantilever beams. In the detailed design the slab will be designed
taking into account bending strength and deflection with references to the BS8110:Part 1:1997.

Reinforced Concrete Block Walls

These block walls are non-load bearing walls since the beams and columns which make up the
frame of the structure transfer the loads from the roof to the foundation. However they will be
reinforced so as to add to the general stiffness of the shaft in the control tower. The walls will
also serve the purpose of shelter. The blocks will be interlocked however the technique of groove
pointing will be employed as a finish.
The size of blocks for external and internal walls are 6 inch hollow concrete blocks.
Concrete infill and vertical reinforcement will also be used.

Internal Concrete Stair Case

For each floor the stair case will rise 3 metres in height per floor. Each step will have a rise of 0.2
metres and a run of 0.3 metres. The landing top and bottom will be of dimensions 1.5 x 1.5 m.
The landing will be of thickness 4 inches. The stair will join the walls of the inner shaft and tie to
the walls of the outer shaft forming a wrap throughout the shaft of the control tower.

Foundation
From the borehole data provided, the type of soil being considered is that of a silty medium to
dense sand. This means that we are designing for a shallow foundation. The advantages of using
a shallow foundation type are:
Affordable cost
Simple construction procedure

 Materials are mostly concrete and reinforcement

The disadvantages of using a shallow foundation type are;
Settlement
Foundation subjected to pull out, torsion and moments.
Irregular ground surface.
The type of foundation chosen is critical since the foundation will act as an anchor to prevent the
control tower from over turning. The type of foundation considered for the control tower is that
of a pad foundation for the dense silty sand provided. A typical pad foundation is seen in
Figure.... below.

Figure .......... showing a typical reinforced pad footing. Picture taken from An Overview of
Footings and Foundations
A pad foundation normally supports a number of column loads in both horizontal directions. The
minimum size of the pad is given by the practical requirement of being able to excavate by hand

to the required depth and level off the bottom and to lay brickwork or fix steel for the columns.
For this design the pad is continuous with beam foundation. The continuous beam foundation
may be required to bridge over weak pockets in the soil or to prevent excessive differential
settlement between adjacent columns.
The advantages of these foundations are, ease of excavation, any formwork required can be
fabricated and assembled in longer lengths and there is more continuity and ease of access for
concreting the foundation.
For the preliminary design of the pad foundation with continuous beams, it must be sufficiently
large so that it can prevent any over-turning moments generated from the cantilever structure.
This overturning moment was calculated using wind and earthquake loads and the total weight of
the structure as well as the foundation size to produce a Factor of Safety. From the wind and
earthquake analysis the base shear generated was more than the total wind loads.
Therefore the Mrot or acting moments due to earthquakes = 43189.2 KN
Mres (restoring moment due to weight of structure)

= 81999.6 KN

Factor of Safety against over-turning

= 43189.2 / 81999.6
= 1.9 > 1.5

Since this is greater than 1.5 the Design for over-turning is Safe.
The length of the foundation must be larger than the top most floor of the control tower. Each
column in the external shaft will rest on a pad foundation. The internal columns will also each
rest on a pad in the centre of the external shaft. On each side of the external shaft an extra metres
of pad foundations will be added on. Each pad is inter connected with ground beams with the
beams connecting to the centre of each footing. This foundation arrangement for the control
tower can be seen in Figure...... below.

Figure........ showing layout of pad and continuous beam foundation.

Dimensions of pad footing:
Dead load of tower

13223.0 KN

Assume a weight of footing

130.0 KN

Total dead Load

13353.0 KN

Live Load

443.5 KN

Design Axial Load (N)

13353.0 + 443.5

13796.5 KN

13796.5 /8

1724.56 KN

2 x N x 10

Load per column on outer shaft

Bearing capacity of soil

N is the SPT value, average SPT value at depth of 1, 2 and 3m = 17 blows

Plan Area of pad footing

Length of footing

1724.56 / 340

5.0m 2

2.25m

Hence provide a 2.25 m square base.

Depth of footing assumed to be 600 mm thick = 0.6 m
Size of Reinforced Beam connecting to footing = 1500 x 600 mm
In order to compensate for over-turning extra footings will be added on to reach a total length
of 12m.
The footing will be 1 metre deep to the column footing. Concrete blocks will be placed along the
continuous beams or backfill can be used followed by hard core, then sand blinding. Over this
layer of sand blinding, polythene will be placed, then a layer of BRC. Over this the ground floor
slab will be placed.
From the calculations done, it was observed that the footings will be closely spaced and for this
preliminary design it will be more economical to use a raft foundation of size 12 x 12 m.

4 inch thick Floor Slab

BRC
Polythene
Sand blinding
Hardcore
backfill
Footing 2.25 x
2.25m 3m

Continuous beam 1500

x600mm

Figure ...... showing section of footing and fill

Finishes
The cab of the control tower will be fitted with double glazed laminated glass. This type of glass
is structurally sound since it is a composite high performance product which combines the
material properties of the glass with the unique properties of PVB such as adhesion to glass,
elasticity and impact resistance. When broken it will still remain integral due to the plastic
between the glass, remaining safe even when broken. The thickness of the glass is 6.4mm thick
which is widely used giving a Class B performance to BS 6206:1981.
The ceilings of the cab will be fitted with acoustic ceiling tiles for aesthetic purposes. The floors
will be tiled and walls painted. The exterior walls will be groove pointed as well as painted.
Double doors will be used at the base of the shaft as well as throughout the shaft windows will
be placed to allow for natural lighting. Finally around the first floor of the cab, a metal balcony
will be placed so as to provide ease of access to glass panels in the VCR when they need to be
cleaned.

Structural materials used in the Control Tower

Reinforced concrete
Concrete is strong in compression but very weak in tension therefore to compensate for this
weakness tensile reinforcement will be applied to all concrete sections. For this material
selection it is important to note the ease of construction and costs play a critical role since it is
less expensive than structural steel.
Some key advantages of reinforced concrete are:
High compressive strength
Economical material for below grade structures
Low maintenance required
Good fire and water resistance
Inexpensive labour requiring less skilled workers for placing and mixing of concrete
Disadvantages of reinforced concrete
Lower strength to volume ratio than steel
Composite material complexities
Lower strength per unit weight compared to steel
Bulky structural member requiring lager foundations

High Tensile Steel

High tensile steel will be used as reinforcement for each concrete section of the structure. Sizes
range from 16-20 diameter bars as well as 10mm diameter bars for stirrups. The steel provides
tensile reinforcement so as to prevent cracking and defections.

Masonry
Concrete versus clay blocks
Concrete blocks have higher compressive strength than clay blocks
Concrete blocks have lower water absorption rates than clay blocks
Clay blocks react more with a humid environment, that is, they tend to swell.

Ferro-cement
This a thin composite made with a cement based mortar matrix reinforced with closely spaced
layers of relatively smaller diameter mesh (Antoine E. Naaman 2000). The basic parameters
which characterise ferrocement are the specific sruface area of reinforcement, the volume
fraction of the reinforcement, the surface cover of the mortar over the reinforcement and the
relatively high quality of the mortar. Ferrocement behaves like reinforced concrete in its load
bearing characterisitcs, with the essential difference being that crack development is retarded by
the dispersion of the reinforcement in fine form throughout the mortar.
Advantages of ferrocement:
Low weight compared to RCC
Cheaper in construction
Less thermal conductivity as compared to RCC
Long lifetime in comparison to steel structures
Ease of construction
Disadvantages
Labour intensive

References
Websites
1. 9th International Symposium on Ferrocement, Bali 2009-01
http://ferro9.unila.ac.id./latest/about-ferrocement.html
(Accessed 10, 01, 2009)
2. Raft Foundation Solutions
www.raftsolutions.co.za
(Accessed 15,01,2009)
3. Earthquake Resistant Design
http://www.Richardpclarke.tripod.com
(Accessed 10,01,2009)
4. Advantages and disadvantages of moment resisting frames
http://www.scholar.google.com/scholar?
q=advantages+disadvantages+of+momnet+resisting+frames
(Accessed 19,01,2009)

BOOKS
5. Reinforced Concrete Designers Handbook , Tenth Edition Charles E Reynolds and James
C Steedman - Chapter 20, Design of Beams and Slabs.
6. Design of Structural Elements Concrete, steelwork, masonry and timber design to British
Standards and Eurocodes Chanakya Arya Page 76, design of pad footing.
7. Structural Design -Extracts from British Standards for Students of Structural design- 5th
Edition BSI.

Proposal for Alternative 1: Reinforced Concrete Control

Tower
Design Philosophy for Control Tower

The design of the control tower takes into account two primary considerations which are
elegance and structural stability. The control tower in any airport should be able to carry out its
functions while at the same time be attractive. In this conceptual design the tower was created
from a number of different ideas all bearing in mind simplicity and dynamic performance. The
tower was designed to be able to withstand earthquake and wind loading as well the foundation
was designed to prevent overturning of the tall structure. With dynamic performance taken care
of, the group was left to make the tower aesthetically pleasing. The domed shape roof of the
structure provides beauty as well as an air of elegance to the high rise building.
The cab was designed with a total 3600 view port fitted with glass facades which amplifies the
appearance of the cab. The shaft of the tower being structurally stable will be painted and groove
pointed with glass windows present on each side of the shaft per floor. This gives the tower a
sophisticated finish as well as it lends to natural lighting of the shaft. The design keeps true to the
wishes of the client since it is distinctive, highly sculpted as well as it represents an iconic
landmark.