Structural Analysis and Design of

Residential Buildings Using Staad.Pro,

Orion, and Manual Calculations

This should be a long post, but I am going to try and keep it as brief as possible. This post is
more like an excerpt from the publication 'Structural Analysis and Design of Residential
Buildings using Staad Pro V8i, CSC Orion, and Manual calculations'.... (See link below).

Here, we are going to briefly present some practical analysis and design of some reinforced
concrete elements using Staad Pro software, Orion software and manual calculations.
Ultimately, we are going to make some comparisons of the results obtained based on the
different methods adopted in the analysis and design. To learn how to model, design, and
detail buildings from the scratch using Staad Pro, Orion, and manual methods, see the link at
the end of this post.

To show how this is done, a simplified architectural floor plans, elevations, and section, for a
residential two storey building have been presented for the purpose of structural analysis and
design (see the pictures below).
Fig 1: Ground Floor Plan

Fig.2: First Floor Plan

Fig.3: Front View

Fig.4: Back View

 Fig.5: Right View

Fig.6: Left View

The first step in the design of buildings is the preparation of the 'general arrangement',
popularly called the G.A. The G.A. is a drawing that shows the disposition of the structural
elements such as the slabs and their types, the floor beams, the columns, and their interaction
at the floor level under consideration. For the architectural drawings above, the adopted G.A.
is shown in Figure 7. below. There are no spelt out rules about how to prepare G.A. from
architectural drawings, but there are basic guidelines that can guide someone on how to
prepare a buildable and structurally efficient G.A. To have a good idea on how this can be
done, see the link at the end of the post.
Fig.7: General Arrangement

Design data:
Fck = 25 N/mm2, Fyk = 460 N/mm2, Cnom (slabs) = 25mm, Cnom (beams and columns) =
35mm, Cnom (foundations) = 50mm
Thickness of slab = 150mm; Dimension of floor beams = 450mm x 230mm; Dimension of
columns = (230 x 230mm)

DESIGN OF THE FLOOR SLABS

PANEL 1: MANUAL ANALYSIS

The floor slab (PANEL 1) is spanning in two directions, since the ratio (k) of the longer side
(Ly) to the shorter side (Lx) is less than 2.
Hence, k = Ly/Lx = 3.825/3.625 = 1.055 (say 1.1)

Moment coefficients () for two adjacent edges discontinuous (pick from table);
Short Span
Mid-span = 0.042
Continuous edge = 0.056
Long Span
Mid-span = 0.034
Continuous edge = 0.045

Design of short span

Mid span
M = nLx2 = 0.042 10.9575 3.6252 = 6.0475 KN.m
MEd = 6.0475 KNm
Effective Depth (d) = h Cc /2
Assuming 12mm bars will be employed for the construction
d = 150 25 6 = 119mm; b = 1000mm (designing per unit width)

k = MEd/(fckbd2 )
= (6.0475 106)/(25 1000 1192 ) = 0.0171
Since k < 0.167 No compression reinforcement required
z = d[0.5+ (0.25 - 0.882k)] = z = d[0.5+ (0.25 - (0.882 0.0273)] = 0.95d
As1 = MEd/(0.87fyk z)
As1 = (6.0475 106)/(0.87 460 0.95 119) = 133.668 mm2/m
Provide Y12mm @ 250mm c/c BOT (ASprov = 452 mm2/m)

A little consideration will show that this provided area of steel will satisfy serviceability limit
state requirements. To see how to carry out deflections and crack control verifications, see the
the link at the bottom of this post.

Result from Orion showing the Short Span (mid span) design moments (Wood and Armer
effects inclusive) (PANEL 1)
Result from Staad showing the Short Span (mid span) design moments (Wood and
Armer effects inclusive) (PANEL 1)
A little observation will show that the design moment values from the different methods are
very similar. The full detailing of the floor slabs is as shown below.

Figure 9: Bottom Reinforcement Detailing

Figure 10: Top Reinforcement Detailing

Figure 11: Section of the floor slab

DESIGN OF THE BEAMS

Let us take Beam No 1 from our GA as a design case study:
The loading of the beam has been carried out as shown below. The beam is primarily
subjected to load from slab, weight of wall, and its own self weight. To see how to manually
calculate the loading on beams, follow the link at the end of the post.

The internal forces from the loading is as shown below;

The internal forces from Orion software for Beam No 1 is as shown below. Load
decomposition using finite element analysis was used for the load transfer.

The internal forces from Staad software for Beam No 1 is as shown below.
As1 = MEd/(0.87fykz)
= (36.66 106)/(0.87 460 0.95 399) = 241.667 mm2
Provide 2Y16 mm BOT (ASprov = 402 mm2)
The detailing of Beam No 1 is as shown below;
DESIGN OF THE COLUMNS
Loads from slabs and beams are transferred to the foundations through the columns. In
typical cases, columns are usually rectangular or circular in shape. Normally, they are usually
classified as short or slender depending on their slenderness ratio, and this in turn influences
their mode of failure. Columns are either subjected to axial, uniaxial, or biaxial loads
depending on the location and/or loading condition. Eurocode 2 demands that we include the
effects of imperfections in structural design of columns. Column design is covered in section
5.8 of EC2.

The column axial loads have been obtained by summing up the reactions from all the beams
supported by the columns, including the self weight of the column. Let us use column A1 as
example. At the roof level, the column is supporting beam No 2 (Support Reaction V1 =
13.27 KN) and Beam No 3 (Support Reaction VA = 12.99 KN). At the first floor level (see
Analysis and Design of Beam No 1 and 2), the column is supporting Beam No 1 (Support
Reaction V1 = 41.38 KN), and Beam No 2 (Support Reaction VA = 42.49 KN). Therefore
the summation of all these loads gives the axial load transferred from the beams. For
intermediate supports, note that the summation of the shear forces at the support gives the
total support reaction (neglect the signs and use absolute value. Another method of
calculating Column Axial Load is by Tributary Area Method. This method has not been
adopted in this work.

COLUMN A1
Total Columns Self weight = 12.14 KN
Load from roof beams = 13.27 + 12.99 = 26.26 KN
Load from floor beams = 46.21 + 42.49 = 88.70 KN
Total = 127.13 KN

Axial Load from Orion (A1) = 126.6 KN

Axial Load from Staad (A1) = 130.684 KN

COLUMN A3
Total Columns Self weight = 12.14 KN
Load from roof beams = 35.41 + 11.46 = 46.87 KN
Load from floor beams = 105.33 + 60.85 = 166.18 KN
Total = 225.19 KN

Axial Load from Orion (A3) = 202.3 KN

Axial Load from Staad (A3) = 201.632 KN

COLUMN A5
Total Columns Self weight = 12.14 KN
Load from roof beams = 17.19 + 5.70 = 22.89 KN
Load from floor beams = 83.64 + 37.91 = 121.55 KN
Total = 156.58 KN

Axial Load from Orion (A5) = 155.9 KN

Axial Load from Staad (A5) = 163.207 KN

COLUMN A7
Total Columns Self weight = 12.14 KN
Load from roof beams = 43.15 + 9.48 = 52.63 KN
Load from floor beams = 38.26 + 62.45 = 100.71 KN
Total = 165.48 KN

Axial Load from Orion (A7) = 133.9 KN

Axial Load from Staad (A7) = 140.392 KN

As you can see, for design purposes, the axial loads from the three methods are very
comparable. To see how to obtain the column design moments from the use of sub-frames,
follow the link at the end of the post.

Design of Column E5
Reading from chart; d2/h = 0.2;
MEd/(fck bh2 )
= (10.002 106)/(25 230 2302 ) = 0.03288
NEd/(fckbh)
= (399.88 103)/(25 230 230) = 0.302
From the chart:
(AsFyk)/(bhfck ) = 0.05
Area of longitudinal steel required (As) = (0.05 25 230 230)/460 = 143.75 mm2
As,min = 0.10 NEd/fyd
= (0.1 399.887)/400 = 0.099 mm2 < 0.002 230 230 = 105.8 mm2
Provide 4Y16mm (Asprov = 804 mm2)

Links
Minimum size = 0.25 = 0.25 16 = 4mm < 6mm
We are adopting Y8mm as links
Spacing adopted = 200mm less than min{b, h, 20, 400mm}

Result from Orion for column E5

Result from Staad for column E5
Staad Provided Y8@225mm links
The column detailing is as shown below;
DESIGN OF FOUNDATIONS
All loads from the superstructure of a building are transferred to the ground. If the foundation
of a building is poorly designed, then all the efforts input in designing the superstructure is in
vain. It is therefore imperative that adequate care be taken in the design of foundations.
Foundation design starts from detailed field and soil investigation. It is very important to
know the index and geotechnical properties of the soil, including the soil chemistry, so that
the performance of the foundation can be guaranteed.

Analysis and Design of footing E8

Bearing Capacity of the foundation = 150 KN/m2;

Effective depth
Concrete cover = 50mm
AssumingY12mm bars,
d = 400 50 6 = 344mm
The ultimate limit state design moment can be obtained by considering the figure below;
k = MEd/(fck bd2)
= (37.518 106)/(25 1000 3442 ) = 0.01268 (designing per metre strip)
Since k < 0.167 No compression reinforcement required
z = d[0.5+ (0.25 - 0.882k)] = z = d[0.5+ (0.25 - (0.882 0.0273)] = 0.95d
As1 = MEd/(0.87fykz)
= (37.518 106)/(0.87 460 0.95 344) = 286.869 mm2/m

To calculate the minimum area of steel required;

fctm = 0.3 (fck)(23) = 0.3 25 (23) = 2.5649 N/mm2 (Table 3.1 EC2)
ASmin = 0.26 fctm/Fyk b d = 0.26 2.5649/460 1000 344 = 498.7 mm2
Check if ASmin < 0.0013 b d (447.2 mm2)
Since, ASmin = 498.7 mm2, the provided reinforcement is adequate.
Provide Y12 @ 200mm c/c (ASprov = 565 mm2/m) each way

Shear at the column face

Ultimate Load on footing from column = 399.887 kN
Design shear stress at the column perimeter vEd = VEd/(u0d)
is the eccentricity factor (see section 6.4.3 of EC2)
= 1+ 1.8[(16.48/230)2+(8.99/230)2] = 1.146
Where uo is the column perimeter and d is the effective depth
vEd = VEd/(u0d)
= (1.15 399.887 103)/(4(230) 344) = 1.452N/mm2
VRd,max = 0.5vfcd
v = 0.6[1 (fck/250) ] = 0.6[1 (25/250) ] = 0.54 N/mm2
fcd = (cc fck)/c = (0.85 25)/1.5 = 14.167 N/mm2
VRd,max = 0.5 0.54 14.167 = 3.825 N/mm2 vEd < VRd,max. This is very ok

Transverse shear at d from the face of column

Width of shaded area = a d = 0.635 0.344 = 0.291m
Area of shaded area = (1.5m 0.291m) = 0.4365 m2
Therefore, VEd = (189.386 + 175.939)/2 0.4365 m2 = 79.077 KN
vEd = VEd/bd
= (79.077 103)/(1500 344) = 0.15325 N/mm2
VRd,c = [CRd,c k (1001 fck )(1/3) + k1.cp] (2d/a) (Vmin + k1.,sub>cp) bw.d
CRd,c = 0.18/c = 0.18/1.5 = 0.12
k = 1+(200/d) = 1+(200/344) = 1.7624 > 2.0, therefore, k = 1.7624
Vmin = 0.035k(3/2) fck(1/2)
= Vmin = 0.035 (1.7624)(3/2) (25)(1/2) = 0.4094 N/mm2
1 = As/bd = 565/(1000 344) = 0.001642 < 0.02;
VRd,c = [0.12 1.7624 (100 0.001642 25 )(1/3) ] = 0.3386 N/mm2 (2d/a) < Vmin
But in this case, d = a
Hence, VRd,c = 2 0.3386 = 0.6772 N/mm2
Since VRd,c (0.6772) > VEd (0.1503 KN), No shear reinforcement is required.

Punching Shear at 2d from the face of column

Punching shear lies outside the footing dimensions. No further check required.

Design Result from Orion

The detailing of the footing is as shown below;
The structural analysis and design of all members have been fully done, including a step by
step tutorial on how to model and design on Orion and Staad Pro, and how to manually
design. See the completed models below;
Fully completed model on Orion

Fully completed model on Staad Pro.