Structural Analysis Report

A REPORT ON

STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS AND DESIGN

OF RESIDENTIAL BUILDING

Owner: - [Link] Bahadur Kandungwa

Address: - Mahalaxmi -04, Lalitpur

Page | 1
 Structural Analysis Report

Table of Contents
CHAPTER 1: GENERAL DATA AND LOAD CALCULATION..................................... 3
Introduction .......................................................................................................................... 3
Description of the Building ................................................................................................ 6
Chapter 2: 3D MODELLING, ANALYSIS AND DESIGN ................................................ 8
Modeling ............................................................................................................................... 8
Analysis ................................................................................................................................. 9
Load Cases....................................................................................................................... 10
Seismic Analysis ............................................................................................................. 14
Design .................................................................................................................................. 16
Modal Data ...................................................................................................................... 17
Centres of Mass and Rigidity ....................................................................................... 18
Story Stiffness.................................................................................................................. 19
Story Drift ........................................................................................................................ 21
Chapter 3 SAMPLE ANALYSIS RESULT AND SAMPLE DESIGN RESULT ............. 24
Sample Column Design .................................................................................................... 24
Column size check.......................................................................................................... 25
Sample Beam Design ......................................................................................................... 26
Sample Slab Design ........................................................................................................... 27
Sample Staircase Design ................................................................................................ 29
Design of Foundation ........................................................................................................ 32
Sloped Footing Design................................................................................................... 33
Sample Strap Footing Design ....................................................................................... 37
Sample Strap Beam Design ........................................................................................... 38
Combined Footing Design ............................................................................................ 42
Chapter 4 DESIGN SUMMARY.......................................................................................... 46
Column Design Summary ................................................................................................ 46
Beam Design Summary .................................................................................................... 46
Slab Design Summary ....................................................................................................... 47
Footing Design Summary ................................................................................................. 47
Chapter 5: ANNEX, CONCLUSION AND REFERENCES............................................. 48
Annex .................................................................................................................................. 48
Conclusion .......................................................................................................................... 69
References ........................................................................................................................... 70

Page | 2
 Structural Analysis Report

CHAPTER 1: GENERAL DATA AND LOAD CALCULATION

Introduction
The basic aim of the structural design is to build a structure, which is safe, fulfilling the
intended purpose during its estimated life span, economical in terms of initial and
maintenance cost, durable and also maintaining a good aesthetic appearance. A building is
considered to be structurally sound, if the individual elements and the building as a whole
satisfy the criteria for strength, stability and serviceability and in seismic areas additional
criteria for ductility and energy absorption capabilities. The overall building must be strong
enough to transfer all loads through the structure to the ground without collapsing or losing
structural integrity by rupture of the material at the critical sections, by transformation of the
whole or parts into mechanisms or by instability. This strength criterion is valid for all loads
that will normally be applied to the building during its lifetime. Accidents, overloading and
disasters are not directly related to design. However, concern is needed for the structure to
have structural integrity. A building needs to be designed for all loads acting on it. Detailed
structural designs are carried out and working drawings are to be prepared. Safety is the
prime concern of the structural design. Serviceability and economy are other basic
requirements that are to be considered during structural design. The building should be
designed not only for vertical loads, but also for horizontal loads such as wind and earthquake
loads. A building and its structural elements must be strong enough to transfer all the loads
acting on it safely to the ground. It should be able to withstand all loads acting on it.

Nepal lies in seismically vulnerable zone. It is located in the boundary of the two colliding
tectonic plates- the Indian plate (Indo-Australian Plate) and the Tibetan plate (Eurasian Plate)
which is known as “Subduction Zone”. Records of earthquakes are available in Nepal since
1255 A.D. Those records reveal that Nepal was hit by 18 major earthquakes since then,
resulting in huge loss of life and property. Out of these earthquakes, the 1833 and 1934
earthquakes were the most destructive ones.

Designing building against earthquake forces does not mean that we are making the building
proof against it. Although we can design such robust structure, it would be too expensive to
build, it would be far cheaper to rebuild the building again instead of making it completely
earthquake proof. The structures are generally designed for much lower seismic forces than
what it may actually experience during its life time. Since the structure is expected to undergo
damage in the event of a severe shaking, reliance is placed on the inelastic response of the
structure beyond yield.

Page | 3
 Structural Analysis Report

Therefore, structures have to be ductile and capable of dissipating energy through inelastic
actions. Ductility can be achieved by avoiding brittle modes of failures. Brittle modes of
failures include, shear and bond failure. Thus, structures should be designed on Weak Beam-
Strong column philosophy.

The structural design alone is not enough to ensure the safety of the building, equally

important, is its construction. The role of the contractor is of paramount importance as he is

the one to execute the construction work at the site. He is required to execute the work

according to the drawings supplied by the consultant to him and detailing has to be

carefully followed. A large percentage of failure of the building is attributed to poor quality

of construction. Past experiences from damages have shown that quality of material and

workmanship plays an important role in good seismic behaviour of the buildings. Hence,

quality assurance in construction is expected to gain good seismic performance.

Page | 4
Structural Analysis Report

Page | 5
 Structural Analysis Report

Description of the Building

Architectural features
Type of Building Residential Building
Number of floors 4 floors
Height of story 2.87448 m
Total Height of Building 11.3792 m
No. of Staircase 1 no.
Wall and Partition Masonry walls
Plinth area 622.93 [Link].

Structural Features
Structural system RCC Frame Structure
Foundation Type Combined, Isolated, Stap Footing
Column size 360mm x 360mm ,410mm x 410mm
Beam Size 230mm x 360mm
Slab 127 mm Overall Depth
Footing Depth Minimum 1500 mm below ground level
Geotechnical Features
Soil Type Type III
Allowable Bearing Capacity 150 kN/m3

Material
Grade of Concrete M20
Grade of Steel Fe500
Unit weight of Concrete 25 kN/m3
Unit weight of Masonry wall 19 kN/m3
Young’s Modulus of Elasticity 5000
Poisson’s Ratio 0.2 for concrete
0.3 for rebar

Page | 6
 Structural Analysis Report

Relevant Codes followed

a. NBC 110 and IS 456-2000: For Design of Structural Elements

b. SP 16: For Design Aid
c. SP 34: For Detailing
d. NBC 105:2020: Seismic Design of Buildings in Nepal

Basic Principle of Analysis of the Structure Step for earthquake load

1. Earthquake load with seismic coefficient method (NBC 105:2020)

Software used for Analysis and Design

a. ETABS v18
b. STAAD RCDC

Preliminary Design for proportioning of the Structural Elements

The tentative sizes of the Structural elements are determined through preliminary design so
that after analysis, the presumed dimensions may not deviate considerably, thus making the
final design both safe and economical. The tentative sizes have been determined as follows:

Slab: From Deflection Criteria [Effective Depth = Effective Shorter Span / (26 * MF)]

Beam: For Practical rule as 25mm Depth for 300mm of Span covering deflection criteria

Column: From evaluation of approximate gravity loading coming up to the critical Column.
To compensate for the possible eccentric Loading and earthquake loads the size is
increased by about 25 % in design.

Page | 7
 Structural Analysis Report

Chapter 2: 3D MODELLING, ANALYSIS AND DESIGN

Modeling
The structural system is designed as a Special Moment Resisting Frame structure. Therefore,
main components to be modeled are: Beams, Columns & Slabs. The analysis software used
for modeling the structure is ETABS v18.

Fig: Plan view of building in ETABS

Page | 8
 Structural Analysis Report

Design Methods of Structural Elements

We have followed Indian Standard Code of Practice for Plain and Reinforced Concrete,
IS: 456 -2000 for design of Structural Elements. This incorporates the two methods of
Structural Design of RC structures specified as:

a. Working Stress Method based on the Working loads in conjunction with permissible stresses
in the materials.
b. Limit State Method based on safety and serviceability requirements associated with the design
loads and design strengths of the materials. These design loads and design strengths are
obtained by applying partial safety factors for characteristic loads and strengths of the
materials concrete and steel.
We have followed the limit state method which is incorporated in IS: 456-2000. It is consistent with
the new philosophy of design termed limit state approach which was incorporated in the Russian
Code – 1954, the British code BS 8110 – 1985 and the American Code ACI 318 – 1989.

Limit State Method

Limit States:
The Limit State method of design covers the various forms of failure. There are several limit
states at which the structure ceases to function, the most important among them being,
a. The limit state of collapse or total failure of structure.
It corresponds to the maximum load carrying capacity. Violation of collapse implies failure.
This limit state corresponds to Flexure, Compression, Shear and Torsion.
b. The limit state of serviceability which includes excessive deflection and excessive local
damage.

Analysis
The analysis has been carried out using a standard software package ETABS v18 based on finite
element method. The software is capable of carrying out a Three-Dimensional analysis. It is
windows-based software. It has a user-friendly graphical input and output interface. It can
account for the rigid zones at the beam - column junction. It has a capability to create a special
joint at any grid intersection. The program has a facility to create shell elements also. Shell
elements can be used for the analysis of Slabs and Shear walls. A full 3D finite element model
using frame and shell elements can also be created using ETABS.

A Three-Dimensional Linear elastic analysis has been carried out. Structure is assumed to be
fixed at the Plinth level. The masonry wall load is distributed in the beams as uniformly
distributed loads. The beams are modelled as rectangular beams. A model based on Rigid
Diaphragm Concept has been considered. This is done by creating a special joint at the centre of
mass of each floor level and constraining all the joints at this level by a diaphragm constraint.

Page | 9
 Structural Analysis Report

Load Cases
Following loads have been considered in the analysis of the building as per NBC 102,
NBC 103, IS 875 and NBC 105:2020.

Load Combination
The load combination has been taken as given in NBC 105:2020. The said code has recommended
the following load combinations:

• 1.2DL + 1.5LL
• DL + λLL ± (Ex ± 0.3Ey)
• DL + λLL ± (0.3Ex ± Ey)
Where, λ = 0.6 for storage facilities
= 0.3 for other usage

Page | 10
Structural Analysis Report

Page | 11
 Structural Analysis Report

Dead Loads
Dead loads are assumed to be produced by slab, beams, columns, walls, parapet walls,
staircase, plasters and mortars, Floor finish and water tank. The weight of building material
is taken as per IS 875(Part 1)-2015.

Specific weight of materials [Ref: IS: 875(Part 1)-2015)]

Unit
Materials weight
Reinforced Concrete 25 KN/m3
Brick Masonry 19 KN/m3
Floor Finishing (Screeding & Punning) 23 KN/m3
Cement Sand Plaster 20 KN/m3+

Floor Finishing (Marble) 26 KN/m3

Live Loads
Live loads are applied on floor slabs on the basis of usage of rooms, as specified in IS 875 part II.
Rooms 2 KN/m2
Toilet/Bathrooms/Kitchens 2 KN/m2
Balcony/Stairs 3 KN/m2
Terrace/Roof 1.5 KN/m2

Floor Finish
Floor Finishing for toilet = 3.0 KN/m²
Floor Finishing for Landing, passages, balcony, etc.= 1.5 kN/m
Floor Finishing for Staircase (with steps) = 2.0 kN/m²
Floor Finishing for Rooms etc.= 1.25 kN/m

Page | 12
 Structural Analysis Report

Wall Load

Dead Load due to the walls on the beam of the Building:

S.N. Dimensions
Width (B) Depth (D)
Building Components Weight Units Remarks
mm mm

A 9"outer wall without opening 0.23 2.5146 11.10 KN/m

15% opening
B 9" outer wall with opening 0.23 2.5146 9.44 KN/m
wall

C 9" inner wall with opening 0.23 2.5146 7.77 KN/m 30% opening

40% opening
D 9" inner wall with opening 0.23 2.5146 6.66 KN/m
wall

E 4" inner wall without opening 0.11 2.5146 5.31 KN/m

15% opening
F 4" Inner wall with opening 0.11 2.5146 4.51 KN/m
wall
30% opening
G 4" Inner wall with opening 0.11 2.5146 3.72 KN/m
wall

H 4" parapet wall 0.15 1.0671 3.12 KN/m

Page | 13
 Structural Analysis Report

Seismic Analysis

Horizontal Base shear Coefficient Calculation

As per NBC 105:2020
(Height of the building
Height of Building (H) = 11.380m from foundation or from
top of a rigid basement.)
Seismic Zone Factor (Z) = 0.35 Ref (Cl 4.1.4)
Importance Factor (I) = 1 Ref (Cl 4.1.5)
Soil Type = D Soil type D
Moment resisting
Structure type = concrete frame
(Kt)= 0.075 Ref (Cl 5.1.2)
Approximate Fundamental Period of Vibration:
(T1) = KtH^0.75= 0.465Sec Ref (Cl 5.1.2)
Amplification of approximate period:
T1=1.25*T1= 0.581Sec Ref (Cl 5.1.3)
Response Spectrum
Method of Analysis= Equivalent Static Method Analysis
Lower period of flat part of spectrum
Ta = 0 Ref (Cl 4.1.2)
Lower period of flat part of spectrum
Tc = 1 Ref (Cl 4.1.2)
Peak spectral acceleration normalized by PGA
α= 2.25 Ref (Cl 4.1.2)
Coefficient that controls the descending branch of the spectrum
K= 1.8 Ref (Cl 4.1.2)
Spectral shape factor
Ch(T) = 2.25 Ref (Cl 4.1.2, Eq. 4.1(2))
Elastic site spectra for horizontal loading
C(T)=Ch(T) Z I= 0.7875 Ref (Cl 4.1.1, Eq. 4.1(1))
Elastic site spectra for Serviceability Limit State (SLS)
Cs(T)= 0.2* C(T) = 0.1575 Ref (Cl 4.2, Eq. 4.2(1))
Ductility Factor
Ductility factor for Ultimate Limit State (ULS)
Rμ = 4 Ref (Cl 5.3.1, Table 5-2)
Overstrength Factor

Page | 14
 Structural Analysis Report

Overstrength factor for ULS

Ωu = 1.5 Ref (Cl 5.4.1, Table 5-2)
Overstrength factor SLS
Ωs = 1.25 Ref (Cl 5.4.2, Table 5-2)
Horizontal base shear coeffieicent for ULS,
Cd(T1)=C(T1)/(Rμ*Ωu)= 0.131 Ref (Cl 6.1.1, Eq. 6.1(1))
Horizontal base shear coeffieicent for SLS,
Cd(T1)=Cs(T1)/Ωs = 0.126 Ref (Cl 6.1.2, Eq. 6.1(2))
Exponent related to the structural period (K)
K= 1.0404343 Ref (Cl 6.3)
Accidental Eccentricity
e= 0.100 Ref (Cl 5.7)

Displacement Check
Allowable ratio ULS= 0.025 Ref (Cl 5.6.3)
Allowable ratio SLS= 0.006 Ref (Cl 5.6.3)
Allowable Displacement ULS
dmax = 0.025H/Rμ = 71.125mm Ref (Cl 5.6.3)
Allowable Displacement SLS
dmax = 0.006H/Rs = 68.28mm Ref (Cl 5.6.3)

Drift Check
Allowable Drift Ratio, ULS
dmax = 0.025/Rμ = 0.00625 Ref (Cl 5.6.3)
Allowable Drift Ratio, SLS
dmax = 0.006/Rs = 0.006 Ref (Cl 5.6.3)

Auto Seismic:

Mass Source

Page | 15
 Structural Analysis Report

Property Modifiers

Design
The design of reinforced concrete structural members includes selection of material properties
(grade of steel and concrete), shape and size of cross section, factor of safety and amount of steel
required. The design of reinforced concrete members is carried out using limit state method as
per IS 456: 2000 and NBC 110. The limit state method is the modern and latest design

Page | 16
 Structural Analysis Report

methodology. This method evolved around 1970’s. Limit state method is based on the concept
of multiple safety factors and attempts to provide adequate safety at the ultimate loads and
adequate serviceability at service loads.
For the design of the members IS 456:2000, design aid SP 16 and NBC 110 have been used.
Footings have been checked for vertical loads and moments developed at the base due to dead
load and live load only. Square footings have been adopted from seismic point of view that
reversal stress may occur. And footing beams are provided for column at foundation for more
rigidity of building and also need for the column located at boundary. Longitudinal
reinforcement in beams and columns has been calculated based on critical load combination
among the thirteen load combinations. Spacing of the shear reinforcement has been calculated
as per the ductility criteria as defined in IS 13920 -2016. Some sample designs are shown later on
in this report.

Modal Data

Modal Participating Mass Ratios

Modal Periods and Frequencies

Page | 17
 Structural Analysis Report

Centres of Mass and Rigidity

Eccentricity Check

Page | 18
 Structural Analysis Report

Mass Irregularity Check

Story Stiffness
TABLE: Story
Stiffness
Story Output Case Shear X Drift X Stiff X Shear Y Drift Y Stiff Y
kN mm kN/m kN mm kN/m
Story4 EQx(ULS) 45.8556 6.325 7249.671 0 0.552 0
Story3 EQx(ULS) 159.5115 7.796 20460.742 0 1.422 0
Story2 EQx(ULS) 273.7542 10.543 25965.668 0 1.591 0
Story1 EQx(ULS) 328.6385 7.25 45329.015 0 0.863 0
Story4 EQx(ULS) 45.8556 6.523 7029.331 0 0.724 0
Story3 EQx(ULS) 159.5115 7.976 20000.015 0 1.925 0
Story2 EQx(ULS) 273.7542 10.807 25331.956 0 2.37 0
Story1 EQx(ULS) 328.6385 7.418 44303.868 0 1.397 0
Story4 EQx(ULS) 45.8556 6.127 7484.272 0 0.379 0
Story3 EQx(ULS) 159.5115 7.616 20943.196 0 0.92 0
Story2 EQx(ULS) 273.7542 10.279 26631.9 0 0.812 0
Story1 EQx(ULS) 328.6385 7.082 46402.727 0 0.329 0
Story4 EQx(SLS) 44.1053 6.084 7249.671 0 0.531 0
Story3 EQx(SLS) 153.4232 7.498 20460.742 0 1.368 0
Story2 EQx(SLS) 263.3055 10.141 25965.668 0 1.53 0
Story1 EQx(SLS) 316.0951 6.973 45329.015 0 0.83 0
Story4 EQx(SLS) 44.1053 6.274 7029.331 0 0.697 0

Page | 19
 Structural Analysis Report

Story3 EQx(SLS) 153.4232 7.671 20000.015 0 1.852 0

Story2 EQx(SLS) 263.3055 10.394 25331.956 0 2.279 0
Story1 EQx(SLS) 316.0951 7.135 44303.868 0 1.344 0
Story4 EQx(SLS) 44.1053 5.893 7484.272 0 0.365 0
Story3 EQx(SLS) 153.4232 7.326 20943.196 0 0.885 0
Story2 EQx(SLS) 263.3055 9.887 26631.9 0 0.781 0
Story1 EQx(SLS) 316.0951 6.812 46402.727 0 0.316 0
Story4 EQy(ULS) 0 0.584 0 45.8556 5.118 8959.672
Story3 EQy(ULS) 0 1.271 0 159.5115 7.083 22518.863
Story2 EQy(ULS) 0 1.546 0 273.7542 9.96 27485.356
Story1 EQy(ULS) 0 0.976 0 328.6385 6.959 47224.093
Story4 EQy(ULS) 0 0.872 0 45.8556 5.269 8702.617
Story3 EQy(ULS) 0 1.755 0 159.5115 7.219 22094.867
Story2 EQy(ULS) 0 2.325 0 273.7542 10.168 26924.35
Story1 EQy(ULS) 0 1.574 0 328.6385 7.074 46457.453
Story4 EQy(ULS) 0 0.408 0 45.8556 4.967 9232.374
Story3 EQy(ULS) 0 0.787 0 159.5115 6.948 22959.45
Story2 EQy(ULS) 0 0.801 0 273.7542 9.752 28070.239
Story1 EQy(ULS) 0 0.406 0 328.6385 6.844 48016.459
Story4 EQy(SLS) 0 0.562 0 44.1053 4.923 8959.672
Story3 EQy(SLS) 0 1.223 0 153.4232 6.813 22518.863
Story2 EQy(SLS) 0 1.487 0 263.3055 9.58 27485.356
Story1 EQy(SLS) 0 0.939 0 316.0951 6.694 47224.093
Story4 EQy(SLS) 0 0.838 0 44.1053 5.068 8702.617
Story3 EQy(SLS) 0 1.688 0 153.4232 6.944 22094.867
Story2 EQy(SLS) 0 2.236 0 263.3055 9.779 26924.35
Story1 EQy(SLS) 0 1.513 0 316.0951 6.804 46457.453
Story4 EQy(SLS) 0 0.392 0 44.1053 4.777 9232.374
Story3 EQy(SLS) 0 0.757 0 153.4232 6.682 22959.45
Story2 EQy(SLS) 0 0.77 0 263.3055 9.38 28070.239
Story1 EQy(SLS) 0 0.39 0 316.0951 6.583 48016.459

Page | 20
 Structural Analysis Report

Story Drift

Permissible story drift = 0.025 x Floor Height

= 0.025 * 2.8702
= 0.072 (Cl. 5.6.3, NBC 105)
Here, Maximum story drift = 0.005824 < 0.076 (OK)

Fig.: Story Drift Graph Along X

Page | 21
 Structural Analysis Report

Fig.: Story Drift Graph Along Y

Torsional Irregularity
Maximum displacement for EQX at one end 61.302
Maximum displacement for EQX at far end 58.098
Ratio 1.06 <1.5 OK
Maximum displacement for EQY at one end 60.518
Maximum displacement for EQY at far end 44.287
Ratio 1.37 <1.5 OK

Page | 22
 Structural Analysis Report

Base Reactions (1DL + 1 LL):

Page | 23
 Structural Analysis Report

Chapter 3 SAMPLE ANALYSIS RESULT AND SAMPLE DESIGN

RESULT

Sample Column Design

ETABS Concrete Frame Design
IS 456:2000 + IS 13920:2016 Column Section Design

Column Element Details Type: Ductile Frame (Summary)

Level Element Unique Name Section ID Combo ID Station Loc Length (mm) LLRF
Story1 C9 5 COL.14"X14" DL+0.3LL+0.6LLS-0.3EQx+EQy 0 2844.8 1

Section Properties
b (mm) h (mm) dc (mm) Cover (Torsion) (mm)
355.6 355.6 60 30

Material Properties
Ec (MPa) fck (MPa) [Link] Factor (Unitless) fy (MPa) fys (MPa)
22360.68 20 1 500 500

Design Code Parameters

ɣC ɣS
1.5 1.15

Axial Force and Biaxial Moment Design For Pu , Mu2 , Mu3

Design Pu Design Mu2 Design Mu3 Minimum M2 Minimum M3 Rebar Area Rebar %
kN kN-m kN-m kN-m kN-m mm² %
331.5158 67.5923 -74.8733 6.6303 6.6303 2216 1.75

Axial Force and Biaxial Moment Factors

K Factor Length Initial Moment Additional Moment Minimum Moment
Unitless mm kN-m kN-m kN-m
Major Bend(M3) 0.801562 2489.2 -43.0321 0 6.6303

Page | 24
 Structural Analysis Report

K Factor Length Initial Moment Additional Moment Minimum Moment

Unitless mm kN-m kN-m kN-m
Minor Bend(M2) 0.802793 2489.2 32.7656 0 6.6303

Shear Design for Vu2 , Vu3

Shear Vu Shear Vc Shear Vs Shear Vp Rebar Asv /s
kN kN kN kN mm²/m
Major, Vu2 35.1374 92.6532 42.0464 35.1374 394.16
Minor, Vu3 35.4678 92.6532 42.0464 35.4678 394.16

Joint Shear Check/Design

Joint Shear Shear Shear Shear Joint Shear
Force VTop Vu,Tot Vc Area Ratio
kN kN kN kN cm² Unitless
Major Shear, Vu2 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
Minor Shear, Vu3 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A

(1.4) Beam/Column Capacity Ratio

Major Ratio Minor Ratio
N/A N/A

Additional Moment Reduction Factor k (IS [Link])

Ag Asc Puz Pb Pu k
cm² cm² kN kN kN Unitless
1264.5 22.2 1969.0305 451.9838 331.5158 1

Additional Moment (IS 39.7.1)

Consider Length Section KL/Depth KL/Depth KL/Depth Ma
Ma Factor Depth (mm) Ratio Limit Exceeded Moment (kN-m)
Major Bending (M3 ) Yes 0.875 355.6 5.611 12 No 0
Minor Bending (M2 ) Yes 0.875 355.6 5.62 12 No 0

Notes:

N/A: Not Applicable

N/C: Not Calculated

N/N: Not Needed

Column size check

fy 500
db 12
fck 20

Page | 25
 Structural Analysis Report

<360
ldh 276.626966 (column
size)

Hence, column size is satisfied as per ductile detailing of NBC 105:2020.

Sample Beam Design

ETABS Concrete Frame Design
IS 456:2000 + IS 13920:2016 Beam Section Design

Beam Element Details Type: Ductile Frame (Summary)

Level Element Unique Name Section ID Combo ID Station Loc Length (mm) LLRF
Story1 B16 51 BEAM.9"X14" DL+0.3LL+0.6LLS+EQx-0.3EQy 3822 3999.8 1

Section Properties
b (mm) h (mm) bf (mm) ds (mm) dct (mm) dcb (mm)
228.6 355.6 228.6 0 60 60

Material Properties
Ec (MPa) fck (MPa) [Link] Factor (Unitless) fy (MPa) fys (MPa)
22360.68 20 1 500 500

Design Code Parameters

ɣC ɣS
1.5 1.15

Factored Forces and Moments

Page | 26
 Structural Analysis Report

Factored Factored Factored Factored

Mu3 Tu Vu2 Pu
kN-m kN-m kN kN
-57.3668 3.1429 48.5089 0

Design Moments, Mu3 & Mt

Factored Factored Positive Negative
Moment Mt Moment Moment
kN-m kN-m kN-m kN-m
-57.3668 4.7246 0 -62.0914

Design Moment and Flexural Reinforcement for Moment, Mu3 & Tu

Design Design -Moment +Moment Minimum Required
-Moment +Moment Rebar Rebar Rebar Rebar
kN-m kN-m mm² mm² mm² mm²
Top (+2 Axis) -62.0914 562 0 562 145
Bottom (-2 Axis) 0 281 0 0 281

Shear Force and Reinforcement for Shear, Vu2 & Tu

Shear Ve Shear Vc Shear Vs Shear Vp Rebar Asv /s
kN kN kN kN mm²/m
62.3746 0 84.3721 38.3256 790.94

Torsion Force and Torsion Reinforcement for Torsion, Tu & VU2

Tu Vu Core b1 Core d1 Rebar Asvt /s
kN-m kN mm mm mm²/m
3.1429 48.5089 128.6 255.6 475.32

Sample Slab Design

Slab No. : S7
Level = 1ST FLOOR
IS 456 : 2000
Design Code = + IS 13920 :
2016
Grade Of Concrete = M20
Grade Of Steel = Fe500
Clear Cover = 20.000 mm
Long Span, Ly = 3.920 m
Short Span, Lx = 3.340 m
Imposed Load = 1.250 kN/sqm
Live Load = 2.000 kN/sqm
Slab Thickness = 127.000 mm
Effective Depth Along LX, Deffx = 102.000 mm
Effective Depth Along LY,
= 92.000 mm
Deffy
Self Weight = 3.175 kN/sqm
Total Load, TL = 6.425 kN/sqm

Page | 27
 Structural Analysis Report

Span = 2-Way
Panel Type = Two Adjacent Edges Discontinuous
Design Moments:
Short Span Positive Moment At Midspan -
Moment Coefficient = 0.046
BM = 3.279 kNm
Mu = 1.5 X BM = 4.919 kNm
Area Of Reinforcement
= 152.400 sqmm/m
Required (Mu)
Reinforcement Provided = H8 @ 152 C/C
= 331.000 sqmm/m
Short Span Negative Moment At Continuous Support -
Moment Coefficient = 0.061
BM = 4.372 kNm
Mu = 1.5 X BM = 6.559 kNm
Area Of Reinforcement
= 153.628 sqmm/m
Required (Mu)
Additional Area Of
= 77.428 sqmm/m
Reinforcement Required
Reinforcement Provided = H8 @ 152 C/C
= 331.000 sqmm/m
Long Span Positive Moment At Midspan -
Moment Coefficient = 0.034
BM = 2.437 kNm
Mu = 1.5 X BM = 3.655 kNm
Area Of Reinforcement
= 152.400 sqmm/m
Required (Mu)
Reinforcement Provided = H8 @ 152 C/C
= 331.000 sqmm/m
Long Span Negative Moment At Continuous Support -
Moment Coefficient = 0.045
BM = 3.249 kNm
Mu = 1.5 X BM = 4.874 kNm
Area Of Reinforcement
= 152.400 sqmm/m
Required (Mu)
Additional Area Of
= 76.200 sqmm/m
Reinforcement Required
Reinforcement Provided = H8 @ 152 C/C
= 331.000 sqmm/m
Distribution Reinforcement @ 0.12% -
Area Of Reinforcement
= 122.400 sqmm/m
Required
Reinforcement Provided = H8 @ 152 C/C

Page | 28
 Structural Analysis Report

= 331.000 sqmm/m
Shear Check :
Along Short Span
Shear Coefficient(Lx), SF1 = 0.462
V = SF1 x TL x Lx = 9.916 kN
Vu = 1.5 X V = 14.875 kN
Shear Stress, Tv = 0.146 N/sqmm
Nominal Shear Stress, Tc = 0.288 N/sqmm
Modification Factor 'K' = 1.300
K x Tc = 0.374
> 0.146 Slab Is Safe In Shear
Along Long Span
Shear Coefficient(Ly), SF2 = 0.400
V = SF2 x TL x Lx = 8.584 kN
Vu = 1.5 X V = 12.876 kN
Shear Stress, Tv = 0.140 N/sqmm
Nominal Shear Stress, Tc = 0.300 N/sqmm
Modification Factor 'K' = 1.300
K x Tc = 0.391
> 0.140 Slab Is Safe In Shear
Deflection Check:
Basic Span To Depth Ratio = 32
Span Correction Factor = 1.000
Tensile Steel Factor = 2.860
Compression Steel Factor = 1.000
Flange Correction Factor = 1.000
Max Span To Depth Ratio = 32.00 x 1.00 x 2.86 x 1.00 x 1.00
= 91.531
Lx/d = 32.745
< 91.531 Slab Is Safe In Deflection

Sample Staircase Design

SLAB NO. : ST1
Level = 1ST FLOOR
IS 456 : 2000 + IS
Design Code =
13920 : 2016

Page | 29
 Structural Analysis Report

Grade Of Concrete = M20

Grade Of Steel = Fe500
Clear Cover = 20.000 mm
Long Span, Ly = 4.000 m
Short Span, Lx = 1.200 m
Slab Thickness = 127.000 mm
Self Weight = 3.175 kN/sqm
Span = Both Ends Fixed

UDL = 4.5 kN/M at 0 M to 0.9 M.

UDL = 6 kN/M at 0.9 M to 2.7 M.
UDL = 4.5 kN/M at 2.7 M to 4 M.

Design Forces:
Location 0 0.1L 0.2L 0.3L 0.4L 0.5L 0.6L 0.7L 0.8L 0.9L L
Moment at Top(kNm) 11.585 5.416 0.487 0.787 5.626 11.372
Moment at Bottom(kNm) 3.131 5.273 5.932 5.109 2.812
Shear(kN) 16.888 13.803 10.717 7.173 3.484 0.204 3.893 7.410 10.495 13.581 16.512
Design Moments:
Negative Moment At Left Support -
BM = -11.585 kNm.
Mu = 1.5 X BM = -17.378 kNm.
Area Of Reinforcement
= 0.000 sqmm/m
Required (Mu)
Reinforcement Provided = N.A.

Negative Moment At Right Support -

BM = -11.372 kNm
Mu = 1.5 X BM = -17.059 kNm
Area Of Reinforcement
= 0.000 sqmm/m
Required (Mu)
Reinforcement Provided = N.A.

Positive Moment along span -

BM = 5.932 kNm
Mu = 1.5 X BM = 8.898 kNm
Area Of Reinforcement
Required (Mu)
= 439.160 sqmm/m

Reinforcement Provided = H12 @ 152 C/C

= 754.000 sqmm/m

All Other Sections provide Minimum Steel @ 0.12% -

Page | 30
 Structural Analysis Report

Area Of Reinforcement
= 122.400 sqmm/m
Required
Reinforcement Provided = H8 @ 152 C/C
= 331.000 sqmm/m

Shear Check :
At Left Support -
V = 16.888 kN
Vu = 1.5 X V = 25.332 kN
Shear Stress, Tv = 0.248 N/sqmm
Nominal Shear Stress, Tc = 0.451 N/sqmm
Modification Factor 'K' = 1.300
K x Tc = 0.586
> 0.248 Slab Is Safe In Shear
At Right Support -
V = 16.512 kN
Vu = 1.5 X V = 24.768 kN
Shear Stress, Tv = 0.243 N/sqmm
Nominal Shear Stress, Tc = 0.451 N/sqmm
Modification Factor 'K' = 1.300
K x Tc = 0.586
> 0.243 Slab Is Safe In Shear

Deflection Check(All Loading Considered) :

Basic Span To Depth Ratio = 26.000
Span Correction Factor = 1.000
Tensile Steel Factor = 2.860
Compression Steel Factor = 1.000
Flange Correction Factor = 1.000
Max Span To Depth Ratio = 26.00 x 1.00 x 2.86 x 1.00 x 1.00
= 74.369
Lx/d = 39.216
< 74.369 Slab Is Safe In Deflection

Page | 31
 Structural Analysis Report

Design of Foundation
The purpose of the foundation is to effectively support the superstructure by
transmitting the applied load effects to the soil below, without exceeding the safe
bearing capacity of the superstructure by ensuring settlement of the structure is within
tolerable limits, and as nearly uniform as possible.

The choice of the type of the foundation depends not only on the type of the

superstructure and the magnitude and types of reactions induced at the base of the

superstructure, but also on the nature of the soil strata on top of which the substructure

is to be founded. Bearing Capacity of Soil is 130 kN/m2.

Page | 32
 Structural Analysis Report

Sloped Footing Design

Footing No : F2
Concrete Grade : M20 N/sqmm
Steel Grade : Fe500 N/sqmm
Clear Cover : 50 mm
Soil Bearing Capacity = 130 kN/sqm

Footing Type : Sloped

Footing Size (Lx B x D) : 1676.4mm X 1676.4mm X 457.2mm, d
=200mm
Column Offset : 101.6 mm
Footing Self Wt., F1 = 22.78 kN
Soil Weight, S1 = 0.00 kN
Total Weight, W1 = F1 + S1
= 22.78 kN
Design For Bending:
Bottom Reinforcement Along L:
Critical Analysis Load Combination = Footing

Page | 33
 Structural Analysis Report

Critical Load Combination = [4] : (DEAD) +(FF) +(PW) +(STAIR DEAD)

+(WL) +(LIVE) +(STAIR LIVE) +(WATER
TANK)
Pu = 324.78 kN
Mux = -2.68 kNm
Muy = 1.15 kNm
P/A = 115.57 kN/sqm
Mx/Zx = -3.41 kN/sqm
My/Zy = 1.46 kN/sqm

Deff = 399.2 mm
Beff = 702.35 mm
SPu = 118.97 kN/sqm
Mu = SPu X B X Loff X Loff / 2
= 43.2 kNm
Pt = 0.256 %
Ast Rqd (BM) = 717 sqmm
Ast Prv (Distributed Across Total = 12 - H12 @ 152.4
Width)
= 1357 sqmm

Bottom Reinforcement Along B:

Critical Analysis Load Combination = Footing
Critical Load Combination = [4] : (DEAD) +(FF) +(PW) +(STAIR DEAD)
+(WL) +(LIVE) +(STAIR LIVE) +(WATER
TANK)
Pu = 324.78 kN
Mux = -2.68 kNm
Muy = 1.15 kNm
P/A = 115.57 kN/sqm
Mx/Zx = -3.41 kN/sqm
My/Zy = 1.46 kN/sqm

Deff = 383 mm
Leff = 702.35 mm
SPu = 117.03 kN/sqm
Mu = SPu X L X Boff X Boff / 2
= 42.5 kNm
Pt = 0.266 %
Ast Rqd (BM) = 717 sqmm
Ast Prv (Distributed Across Total
= 12 - H12 @ 152.4
Length)

Page | 34
 Structural Analysis Report

= 1357 sqmm

Design For Shear:

One Way Shear Along L:
Critical Section @ d from Column Face
= 399 mm
Critical Analysis Load Combination = Footing
Critical Load Combination = [4] : (DEAD) +(FF) +(PW) +(STAIR DEAD)
+(WL) +(LIVE) +(STAIR LIVE) +(WATER
TANK)
Pu = 324.78 kN
Mux = -2.68 kNm
Muy = 1.15 kNm
P/A = 115.57 kN/sqm
Mx/Zx = -3.41 kN/sqm
My/Zy = 1.46 kN/sqm

Deff = 262 mm
Beff = 1158.4 mm
SPu = 118.97 kN/sqm
Vu = SPu X (Loff - d) X B
= 51.66 kN
Tv = Vu / (Beff X Deff)
= 0.17 N/sqmm
Tc = 0.36 N/sqmm
Tv < Tc

One Way Shear Along B:

Critical Section @ d from Column Face

= 383 mm
Critical Analysis Load Combination = Footing
Critical Load Combination = [4] : (DEAD) +(FF)
+(PW) +(STAIR DEAD)
+(WL) +(LIVE) +(STAIR
LIVE) +(WATER TANK)
Pu = 324.78 kN
Mux = -2.68 kNm
Muy = 1.15 kNm
P/A = 115.57 kN/sqm
Mx/Zx = -3.41 kN/sqm

Page | 35
 Structural Analysis Report

My/Zy = 1.46 kN/sqm

Deff = 253 mm
Leff = 1126.4 mm
SPu = 117.03 kN/sqm
Vu = SPu X (Boff - d) X L
= 53.95 kN
Tv = Vu / (Leff X Deff)
= 0.19 N/sqmm
Tc = 0.37 N/sqmm
Tv < Tc

Load Transfer Check For Load Transfer From Column To Footing

Critical Analysis Load Combination = Footing
Critical Load Combination = [4] : (DEAD) +(FF)
+(PW) +(STAIR DEAD)
+(WL) +(LIVE) +(STAIR
LIVE) +(WATER TANK)
Pu = 324.78 kN
A2 = 0.13 sqm
A1 = 4.79 sqm
Base Area = 2.81 sqm
A1 > Base Area
Thus, A1 = 2.81
Modification Factor = SquareRoot(A1/A2) < =
2
SquareRoot(A1/A2) = 4.6492
Thus, Modification Factor = 2
Concrete Bearing Capacity = 0.45 X Fck X Modification Factor X
Column Area
= 2332.8 kN
Concrete Bearing Capacity > Pu, Hence Safe.

Page | 36
 Structural Analysis Report

Sample Strap Footing Design

General Data:
Region = F4
Design Code = IS 456
Grade Of Concrete = M20
Grade Of Steel = Fe500
Clear cover Top = 50 mm
Clear cover Bottom = 50 mm

TopX
Through
Ast Required = 529.6 sqmm/m
Ast Provided = 754 sqmm/m
Reinforcement = H12@150C/C (MESH)

TopY
Through
Ast Required = 565.41 sqmm/m
Ast Provided = 754 sqmm/m
Reinforcement = H12@150C/C (MESH)

BottomX
Through
Ast Required = 548.64 sqmm/m
Ast Provided = 754 sqmm/m
Reinforcement = H12@150C/C (MESH)

BottomY
Through
Ast Required = 548.64 sqmm/m
Ast Provided = 754 sqmm/m
Reinforcement = H12@150C/C (MESH)

Page | 37
 Structural Analysis Report

Design For Shear:

One Way Shear In X Direction
Critical Section @ Deff From Next Step / Column
= 394.7 mm
Face
Critical Load Combination = Dead +Live +FF +WL
C / S Area = 781901 sqmm
Vu = 114.12 kN
Tv = 0.15 N/sqmm
Tc = 0.32 N/sqmm
Tv < Tc Ok

One Way Shear In Y Direction

Critical Section @ Deff From Next Step / Column
= 369.7 mm
Face
Critical Load Combination = Dead +Live +FF +WL
C / S Area = 732376 sqmm
Vu = 119.19 kN
Tv = 0.16 N/sqmm
Tc = 0.33 N/sqmm
Tv < Tc Ok

Sample Strap Beam Design

IS 456-2000 Concrete Beam Design

Geometric Properties

Combination = Overall Envelope

Beam Label = 1
Section Property = STRAP BEAM
Length = 4.94891 m
Section Width = 355.6 mm
Section Depth = 457.2 mm
Distance to Top Rebar Center = 50 mm
Distance to Bot Rebar Center = 50 mm

Material Properties

Concrete Comp. Strength = 20 N/mm2

Concrete Modulus = 22360.68 N/mm2
Longitudinal Rebar Yield = 500 N/mm2
Shear Rebar Yield = 275.79032 N/mm2

Page | 38
Structural Analysis Report

Page | 39
Structural Analysis Report

Page | 40
Structural Analysis Report

Page | 41
 Structural Analysis Report

Combined Footing Design

General Data:
Region = CF
Design Code = IS 456
Grade Of Concrete = M20
Grade Of Steel = Fe500
Clear cover Top = 50 mm
Clear cover Bottom = 50 mm

TopX
Through
DEAD +LIVE +FF +WL +STAIR DEAD +STAIR LIVE
Critical Load Combination =
+WATER TANK +PW
SLdeff = 395 mm
Mux = 6.59 kN-m/m
Ast Required = 457.2 sqmm/m
Ast Provided = 754 sqmm/m
Reinforcement = H12@150C/C (MESH)

Page | 42
 Structural Analysis Report

TopY
Through
DEAD +LIVE +FF +WL +STAIR DEAD +STAIR LIVE
Critical Load Combination =
+WATER TANK +PW
SLdeff = 370 mm
Muy = 89.47 kN-m/m
Ast Required = 579.29 sqmm/m
Ast Provided = 754 sqmm/m
Reinforcement = H12@150C/C (MESH)

BottomX
Through
DEAD +LIVE +FF +WL +STAIR DEAD +STAIR LIVE
Critical Load Combination =
+WATER TANK +PW
SLdeff = 395 mm
Mux = 11.5 kN-m/m
Ast Required = 548.64 sqmm/m
Ast Provided = 754 sqmm/m
Reinforcement = H12@150C/C (MESH)

BottomY
Through
DEAD +LIVE +FF +WL +STAIR DEAD +STAIR LIVE
Critical Load Combination =
+WATER TANK +PW
SLdeff = 370 mm
Muy = 21.39 kN-m/m
Ast Required = 548.64 sqmm/m
Ast Provided = 754 sqmm/m
Reinforcement = H12@150C/C (MESH)

Punching Shear Design:

Tv
Elemen Critical Elemen SLdef B K <
SPu bpm barea Pu Vcr Tv Tc Tce
t Name LC t Size f c s Tc
e
(kN/sqm (mm (sqmm (N/sqmm (N/sqmm (N/sqmm
(mm) (mm) (kN) (kN)
) ) ) ) ) )
DEAD
+LIVE
+FF
+WL 355 330.0 292.9
C10 382.2 91.67 1834 700955 0.44 1.12 1 1 1.12 Ok
+STAIR X355 4 6
DEAD
+STAIR
LIVE

Page | 43
 Structural Analysis Report

+WATE
R TANK
+PW
DEAD
+LIVE
+FF
+WL
+STAIR
355 112856 397.4 353.6
C7 DEAD 382.2 80.37 2953 0.32 1.12 1 1 1.12 Ok
X355 0 3 3
+STAIR
LIVE
+WATE
R TANK
+PW

TABLE: Soil Pressures -

Summary
Pan Output CaseTyp MaxPr MinPr GlobalX GlobalY GlobalX GlobalY
el Case e ess ess Max Max Min Min
Tex kN/m kN/m
t Text Text 2 2 m m m m

1 DEAD LinStatic -30.17 -75.89 -0.72228 1.57693 1.06924 9.61092

1 LIVE LinStatic 1.63 -19.16 8.08648 9.81412 3.64175 4.65795

1 FF LinStatic 0.91 -13.19 8.08648 9.81412 3.64175 4.65795

1 WL LinStatic 12.47 -62.95 3.64175 4.65795 8.44648 9.15593

STAIR
1 DEAD LinStatic 0.22 -15.13 3.64175 0.58361 8.44648 9.15593
STAIR
1 LIVE LinStatic 0.1 -7.17 3.64175 0.58361 8.44648 9.15593
WATER
1 TANK LinStatic 0.36 -1.47 3.64175 0.58361 8.18989 3.92356

1 PW LinStatic 0.57 -4.78 8.08648 9.81412 3.64175 4.65795

UDCO Combina -
1 NN2 tion -56.01 129.98 -0.4315 3.56356 0.52685 7.50273

Page | 44
Structural Analysis Report

Page | 45
 Structural Analysis Report

Chapter 4 DESIGN SUMMARY

Column Design Summary

Beam Design Summary

BEAM DESIGN SUMMARY ( M20:Fe500)

BOTTOM
TOP REINFORCEMENT
REINFORCEMENT
SIZE
MID MID
LEFT RIGHT LEFT RIGHT
SPAN SPAN
FIRST,
230x
SECOND 3-H12 3-H12 3-H12 2-H16 2-H16 2-H16
360
FLOOR
THIRD 230x
3-H12 3-H12 3-H12 2-H16 2-H16 2-H16
FLOOR 360
FOURTH 230x
3-H12 3-H12 3-H12 3-H12 3-H12 3-H12
FLOOR 360

Page | 46
 Structural Analysis Report

Slab Design Summary

Thickness = 127mm

Design Code = IS 456 + IS 13920 - 2016 Grade of Concrete = M20 Grade of Steel = Fe500

Bottom SS Bottom LS Top SS Top LS Distribution

H8 @ 153 H8 @ 153 H8 @ 153 H8 @ 153 H8 @ 153

Footing Design Summary

Page | 47
 Structural Analysis Report

Chapter 5: ANNEX, CONCLUSION AND REFERENCES

Annex

Page | 48
Structural Analysis Report

Page | 49
Structural Analysis Report

Page | 50
Structural Analysis Report

Page | 51
Structural Analysis Report

Page | 52
Structural Analysis Report

Page | 53
Structural Analysis Report

Page | 54
Structural Analysis Report

Page | 55
Structural Analysis Report

Page | 56
Structural Analysis Report

Page | 57
Structural Analysis Report

Page | 58
Structural Analysis Report

Page | 59
Structural Analysis Report

Page | 60
Structural Analysis Report

Page | 61
Structural Analysis Report

Page | 62
Structural Analysis Report

Page | 63
Structural Analysis Report

Page | 64
Structural Analysis Report

Page | 65
Structural Analysis Report

Page | 66
Structural Analysis Report

Page | 67
Structural Analysis Report

Page | 68
 Structural Analysis Report

Conclusion
Ductility and strength required to resist major earthquake can be achieved by
following the recommendations made in the standard codes of practice for
earthquake resistant design. After the analysis of the building components, the
building is found to be safe against the loads considered above. All the sections are
found to be stressed within the permissible limits due to axial, shear, flexural and
torsional forces produced due to above forces. The slab and foundations were
checked manually. Shear stirrups is sufficiently provided so that none of the
elements are Vulnerable to shear failure and failure mode will be flexural, which is
more ductile. Bearing capacity of the soil is assumed to be 130 KN/m2. It is strongly
recommended to check the bearing capacity before construction so as to ensure the
assumed value is within safe limits. The structural safety would further depend upon
the effectiveness of construction procedures as well as collapse and serviceability
criteria followed during the construction phases.
Design and construction of the structure are interrelated jobs. A building behaves in
a manner how it has been built rather than what the intensions is during designing.
A large percentage of structural failures are attributed due to poor quality of
construction. Therefore, quality assurance is needed in both design and construction.
Durable M20 concrete has been used in the foundation which is in contact with the
soil. M20 grade of concrete is used during analysis and design of slabs, beams and
columns. Ductile detailing has been extensively adopted while detailing.

Page | 69
 Structural Analysis Report

References
IS: 456 – 2000 Code of Practice for Plain and Reinforced Concrete

IS: 875 (Parts 1 -5) Code of practice for design loads (other than earthquake) for
buildings and structures (second revision) Part 1 – Dead loads Part 2 – Imposed
loads

NBC 105: 2020 Seismic Design of Buildings in Nepal

NBC (101, 102, 103, 104, 110)

IS: 13920 - 2016 Ductile Detailing of Reinforced Concrete Structures subjected to

Seismic forces - Code of Practice

SP: 16 – 1980 Design Aids for Reinforced Concrete to IS: 456 – 1978

SP: 34 – 1987

Jain, A.K.

Handbook on Concrete Reinforcement Detailing

Reinforced Concrete, Limit State Design, fifth edition, Nem Chand and Bros,
Rookie, 1999 Sinha, S. N.

Pillai,U.C. and Menon,D.

Reinforced Concrete Design, Second edition, Tata McGraw Hill Publishing

Company Ltd, New Delhi, 1996

Reinforced Concrete Design, Second edition, Tata McGraw Hill Publishing

Company Ltd, New Delhi, 2003

Page | 70