Jaw-and-jco-office

STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS REPORT ON PROPOSED JAW AND JCO OFFICE BUILDING OF CHANDILAL GUN SINGHADURBAR, KATHMANDU

FEBRUARY, 2020 Client: Consultant: Nepal Government BRS Engineering Solution Pvt. Ltd Ministry of Physical Infrastructure and Development Department of Urban Development and Building Pulchowk, Lalitpur Construction(DUDBC) Special Building Construction Project Coordination Office Babarmahal, Kathmandu

BRS Engineering Solution Pvt. Ltd Pulchowk, Lalitpur

STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS REPORT JAW AND JCO OFFICE BUILDING, S I N G H A D U R B A R ,

Table of Contents 1.0 INTRODUCTION................................................................................................................2 1.1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY...............................................................................................2 1.2 Structural Analysis............................................................................................................2 1.3 Structural Modeling.........................................................................................................3 2.0 STRUCTURAL SYSTEMS FOR THE BUILDING...........................................................4 3.0

GENERAL DATA FOR STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS.......................................................4

3.1 Grade of Concrete.............................................................................................................4 3.2 Reinforcement Steel..........................................................................................................4 3.3 Cover to Reinforcements..................................................................................................5 3.4 Reference Codes...............................................................................................................5 3.5 General Building Information................................................................................................5 4.0 LOAD CALCULATIONS....................................................................................................6 4.1 Gravity Loads....................................................................................................................6 4.2 Live Loads.........................................................................................................................6 4.3 Dead Load.........................................................................................................................6 4.4 Seismic Load.....................................................................................................................8 4.5 Wind Loads.....................................................................................................................19 4.6 Soft Storey.......................................................................................................................19 5.0 LOAD COMBINATIONS..................................................................................................20 6.0

ANALYSIS AND DESIGN PROCEDURE......................................................................20

6.1 Structure Idealization...........................................................................................................21 7.0 MODELING IN ETABS 2016...........................................................................................22 8.0

DEFLECTION AND STOREY DRIFT.............................................................................28

9.0

MODAL PARTICIPATING MASS RATIOS...................................................................36

10.0

DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL ELEMENTS......................................................................37

10.1 Design of Column...........................................................................................................37 10.2 Design of Beam...............................................................................................................40 10.3 Design of Slab.................................................................................................................43 10.4 Design of Staircase..........................................................................................................46 10.5 Design of Shear wall.......................................................................................................50 10.6 Design of Footing............................................................................................................52 11.0 STRONG COLUMN WEAK BEAM CHECK..................................................................53 ANNEX.........................................................................................................................................56

1|Page

BRS Engineering Solution Pvt. Ltd Pulchowk, Lalitpur

1.0 1.1

STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS REPORT JAW AND JCO OFFICE BUILDING, S I N G H A D U R B A R ,

INTRODUCTION EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

This report has been prepared as a part of the structural engineering analysis and design of Institutional Building to be built in Sighandurbar Premises as partial requirement of application for permission to construct the building. This Report describes in brief the Structural Aspects and Design Report of the proposed building. The analysis and design have been carried out using finite element software ETABS 2016 and foundation has been designed from SAFE 2016. These software provide the Structural Engineer with all the tools necessary to create, modify, analyze, design, and optimize the structural elements in a building model. The structure design is intended to be based primarily on the current National Building Code of Practice of Nepal taking account of relevant Indian Codes for the provisions not covered in this.

1.2

Structural Analysis

Intuitional buildings should fulfill the structural standards. Primary objective of the Structural Analysis of proposed “JAW and JCO Office Building” is to analyze the proposed building in seismic perspective primarily on the current National Building Code of Practice of Nepal (NBC 105:2020). This report has been prepared as a part of the structural engineering analysis and design of accommodation Block of JAW and JCO Line. Three blocks have been proposed separated by expansion joints. This report describes in brief the Structural Aspects and Design Report of the proposed blocks.

2|Page

BRS Engineering Solution Pvt. Ltd Pulchowk, Lalitpur

1.3

STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS REPORT JAW AND JCO OFFICE BUILDING, S I N G H A D U R B A R ,

Structural Modeling

A three-dimensional mathematical model of the physical structure should be used that represents the spatial distribution of the mass and stiffness of the structure to an extent that is adequate for the calculation of the significant features of its dynamic response. Thus, the essential requirements of the model is that, it should include the sufficient detail in geometry, support, material, members, loading, strength, rigidity, stability etc. such that it reflects the real and true prototype of a physical structure. In modeling, for the vertical loading system, the deflection on the column in axial direction is so minimal that we can neglect it. It is because of high rigidity of column in axial direction whereas in horizontal loading system, the in-plane stiffness of floor is assumed to be very high compared to the stiffness of other frame members in that plane. It is because of the presence of the slab. Since, the slab has very high in-plane rigidity, the member like column, wall and braces connected to that plane are assumed to move as a single unit in the lateral direction. This system is known as rigid floor diaphragm in which beam is monolithically connected with slab providing negligible bending in the vertical plane. For the modeling of this building, ETABS 2016 software was used. ETABS 2016 is a sophisticated, yet easy to use, special purpose analysis and design program developed specifically for building systems. ETABS 2016 features an intuitive and powerful graphical interface coupled with unmatched modeling, analytical, design, detailing procedure, powerful numerical methods and many international design codes all integrated using a common database. Although quick and easy for simple structures, ETABS 2016 can also handle the largest and most complex building models, including the wide range of nonlinear behaviors, making it the tool of choice for structural engineers in the building industry.

3|Page

BRS Engineering Solution Pvt. Ltd Pulchowk, Lalitpur

2.0

STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS REPORT JAW AND JCO OFFICE BUILDING, S I N G H A D U R B A R ,

STRUCTURAL SYSTEMS FOR THE BUILDING

The structural system chosen is Building with ductile RC structural walls with RC SMRFs (Dual System). Columns and beams have been laid out in plan in coordination with architectural and services planning that acts jointly support and transmit to the ground those forces arising from earthquake motions, gravity and live load. Its role becomes increasingly important with the increase in building height. Thus, the vital criteria for structural systems are an adequate reserve of strength against failure, adequate lateral stiffness, and an efficient performance during the service life of the building. The determination of the structural forms of a building involves the selection and arrangement of the major structural elements to resist most efficiently the various combinations of gravity and horizontal loadings. The choice of structural form is strongly influenced by the internal planning, the material and method of construction, the external architectural treatment, the location and routing of service systems, the nature and magnitude of the horizontal loading, and the height and proportion of the building.

3.0

GENERAL DATA FOR STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS

Grade of Concrete and Cover to the Reinforcement is provided according to the provisions of the Indian Code. The appropriate grade of concrete and nominal cover to reinforcement is governed by the following main considerations: i) Durability of Concrete incl. Fire resistance rating ii) Corrosion Protection of the Reinforcement iii) Bar Size iv) Nominal maximum aggregate size

3.1

Grade of Concrete

The Indian Code IS: 456-2000, permits a minimum grade of concrete for reinforced concrete members as M20 and the following concrete grades shall be used for “normal” conditions: Foundation: M25 Column: M30 Beam: M30 Slab: M30 Shear Wall: M30

3.2

Reinforcement Steel

All reinforcing steel to be used in the structural elements shall have a yield stress of 500 MPa, (Thermo-Mechanically Treated bars), conforming to IS: 1786-1985.

4|Page

BRS Engineering Solution Pvt. Ltd Pulchowk, Lalitpur

3.3

STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS REPORT JAW AND JCO OFFICE BUILDING, S I N G H A D U R B A R ,

Cover to Reinforcements Clear cover to the main reinforcement in the various structural elements shall be as follows: a) b) c) e)

3.4

Footings (Bottom): Footings (Top and Sides): Columns: Beams: Slabs:

50 mm 50 mm 40 mm 25 mm or bar diameter whichever is greater 20 mm or bar diameter whichever is greater

Reference Codes

Many international standard codes of practices were adopted for the creation of mathematical model, its analysis and design. As per the requirements, National Building Code was used for the load combination in order to check for the worse case during analysis. Some of the codes used are enlisted below:  IS 875:1998 (Part I) Code of Practice for Design Loads (Part I: Dead Loads)  IS 875:1998 (Part II) Code of Practice for Design Loads (Part II: Imposed Loads)  IS 456:2000 Plain and reinforced concrete Design Code of Practice  IS 13920:2016 Ductile Detailing of Criteria Reinforced Concrete Structures subjected to Seismic Force  IS 1893:2016 Criteria for Earthquake Resistant Construction of Buildings  SP 16: Design Aids for Reinforced Concrete  NBC 105:2020 Nepal National Building code – Seismic Design of Building in Nepal

3.5 General Building Information

Fig 1: General Layout of the Building 5|Page

BRS Engineering Solution Pvt. Ltd Pulchowk, Lalitpur

STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS REPORT JAW AND JCO OFFICE BUILDING, S I N G H A D U R B A R ,

4.0

LOAD CALCULATIONS

4.1

Gravity Loads

Gravity loading is primarily due to the self-weight of the structure, superimposed dead load and occupancy of the building. Following loads have been considered for the analysis and design of the building based on the relevant Indian Standards.

4.2

Live Loads

The Live Load for building has been adopted as given IS 875 - Part II Section I Loads for residential buildings. The following value has been adopted: For Bedrooms: 2 kN/m2 For Toilet/Bathrooms: 2 kN/m2 For corridors, passages, halls, and stairs: 4 kN/m 2 For terrace (accessible): 1.5 kN/m2 For terrace (inaccessible): 0.75 kN/m2

4.3

Dead Load

The Dead Load for building has been taken as following: The Dead load on the frame is calculated floor wise and it comprises of Beams, Slabs, Stairs, Foundation, Partition wall, Floor finishes etc. Density of Materials assumed: Concrete: 25 kN/m3 Brick Masonry: 19.2 kN/m3   Maximum Finishing Load Consideration Floor Finish 1.5 kN/m2

IS 875:Part I IS 875:Part I

 

6|Page

BRS Engineering Solution Pvt. Ltd Pulchowk, Lalitpur

STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS REPORT JAW AND JCO OFFICE BUILDING, S I N G H A D U R B A R ,

Wall Loads: Thickness of Wall

Wall Height

Beam Depth

Opening Percentage

Wall Load

(mm)

(m)

(mm)

(%)

1

230

3.3

650

0

2

230

3.3

650

30

3

230

3.3

0

0

4

230

3.3

450

0

5 7 8 9 10

230 125 125 125 125

3.3 3.3 3.3 3.3 1

450 650 650 0 0

30 0 30 0 0

(kN/m) 11.702 4 8.1916 8 14.572 8 12.585 6 8.8099 2 6.36 4.452 7.92 2.4

S.No.

Wall Load for ETABS (kN/m) 11.8 8.2 14.6 12.6 8.9 6.4 4.5 8 2.5

7|Page

BRS Engineering Solution Pvt. Ltd Pulchowk, Lalitpur

STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS REPORT JAW AND JCO OFFICE BUILDING, S I N G H A D U R B A R ,

4.4 Seismic Load 4.4. 1 Equivalent Static Method (ESM) Clause 3.2.1 of NBC 105:2020 contains provisions for Static analysis using equivalent lateral force procedure. Equivalent Static Method may be used for all serviceability limit state (SLS) calculations regardless of building characteristics. For ultimate limit state (ULS), the Equivalent Static Method may be used when at least one of the following criteria is satisfied: i) The height of the structure is less than or equal to 15m. ii) The natural time period of the structure is less than 0.5 secs. iii) The structure is not categorized as irregular as per 5.5 and the height is less than 40m.

Fig 2: Spectral Shape Factor, Ch(T) for Equivalent Static Method (Figure 4-1 from NBC 105:2020)

HORIZONTAL BASE SHEAR COEFFICIENT 4.4.1.1 Ultimate Limit State For the ultimate limit state, the horizontal base shear coefficient (design coefficient), Cd (T1), shall be given by: Cd (𝑇1) = C (𝑇1) / (Rµ x Ωu) Where, C (T1) = Elastic Site Spectra as per 4.1.1 Rµ = Ductility Factor as per 5.3 𝛀u = Over strength Factor for ULS as per 5.4

8|Page

BRS Engineering Solution Pvt. Ltd Pulchowk, Lalitpur

STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS REPORT JAW AND JCO OFFICE BUILDING, S I N G H A D U R B A R ,

4.4.1.2 Serviceability Limit State For the serviceability limit state, the horizontal base shear coefficient (design coefficient), Cd (T1), shall be given by: Cd (𝑇1) = Cs (𝑇1) / (Ωs) Where, Cs (T1) = Elastic Site Spectra determined for Serviceability Limit State as per 4.2 𝛀s = Over strength Factor for SLS as per 5.4 Calculation of Horizontal Base Shear Coefficient for MRF: Height Of The Building (H) = 22.35 mete   r For Moment Resisting Concrete Frame, Value of Kt = 0.075     Appropriate Fundamental period of vibration, T1 = kt 0.77093792 Sec   H3/4 2 Amplification of appropriate Fundamental period of 0.96367240 Sec   Vibration , T =1.25*T1 3 Hence,       Time Period Of Building (T) = 0.96367240 Sec   3 Soil Type = D   Kathmandu Ta 0.5     Tc 2     α 2.25     k 0.8             Spectral Shape Factor Ch(T)       Ta <= T <= Tc

2.25

 

 

Seismic Zoning factor (Z) =

0.35

 

 

Importance Class

II

 

 

Importance Factor (I) =   Elastic Site Spectra C (T) =

1.25   0.984375

     

    Clause 4.1.1

    Elastic Site Spectra For Serviceability limit state C S (T) =

    0.196875

     

    Clause 4.1.2

   

   

   

    9|Page

BRS Engineering Solution Pvt. Ltd Pulchowk, Lalitpur

STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS REPORT JAW AND JCO OFFICE BUILDING, S I N G H A D U R B A R ,

Calculation of Horizontal Base Shear Coefficient   Type of Structural System = Moment resisting Frame   Elastic Site Spectra as per 4.1.1 C(T1) = 0.984375 Elastic Site Spectra for serviceability limit state as per 0.196875 4.1.2 Cs (T1) = Ductility Factor As Per 5.3, Rµ = 4 Over Strength Factor for ULS as per 5.4, Ωu = 1.5 Over Strength Factor for SLS as per 5.4, Ωs = 1.25 For The Ultimate Limit State     0.1640625         For the Serviceability limit State     0.1575 Calculation of Horizontal Base Shear Coefficient for Dual System: Height Of The Building (H) = 22.05

       

       

                 

                 

mete r

Value of Kt for other systems=

0.05

Appropriate Fundamental period of vibration, T1

0.51395861 5

Sec

Amplification of appropriate Fundamental period of Vibration , T =1.25*T1

0.64244826 8

Sec

Hence,

 

 

 

Time Period Of Building (T) =

0.64244826 8

Sec

 

Soil Type =

D

 

Kathmandu

Ta

0.5

 

 

Tc

2

 

 

α

2.25

 

 

k

0.8

 

 

 

 

 

  10 | P a g e

BRS Engineering Solution Pvt. Ltd Pulchowk, Lalitpur

STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS REPORT JAW AND JCO OFFICE BUILDING, S I N G H A D U R B A R ,

Spectral Shape Factor Ch(T)

 

 

 

Ta <= T <= Tc

2.25

 

 

Seismic Zoning factor (Z) =

0.35

 

 

Importance Class

II

 

 

Importance Factor (I) =

1.25

 

 

 

 

 

 

Elastic Site Spectra C (T) =

0.984375

 

Clause 4.1.1

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Elastic Site Spectra For Serviceability limit state C S (T) =

0.196875

 

Clause 4.1.2

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Calculation of Horizontal Base Shear Coefficient

 

 

 

Type of Structural System = Moment resisting Frame

 

 

 

Elastic Site Spectra as per 4.1.1 C(T1) =

0.984375

 

 

Elastic Site Spectra for serviceability limit state as per 4.1.2 Cs (T1) =

0.196875

 

 

Ductility Factor As Per 5.3, Rµ =

3.5

 

 

Over Strength Factor for ULS as per 5.4, Ωu =

1.4

 

 

Over Strength Factor for SLS as per 5.4, Ωs =

1.2

 

 

For The Ultimate Limit State

 

 

 

 

0.200

 

 

For the Serviceability limit State

 

 

 

 

0.1640625

 

  11 | P a g e

BRS Engineering Solution Pvt. Ltd Pulchowk, Lalitpur

STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS REPORT JAW AND JCO OFFICE BUILDING, S I N G H A D U R B A R ,

NOTE: For Portico block, T1 < 0.5 seconds, hence K = 1 And, Ta
Where, di = elastic horizontal displacement of center of mass at level i, ignoring the effects of torsion. Fi = lateral force acting at level i g = acceleration due to gravity i = level under consideration n = number of levels in the structure Wi = seismic weight at level i ii) Empirical Equations The approximate fundamental period of vibration, T1, in seconds is determined from following empirical equation: T1 = kt H 0.75 Where, kt = 0.075 for Moment resisting concrete frame = 0.085 for Moment resisting structural steel frame = 0.075 for eccentrically braced structural steel frame = 0.05 for all other structural systems Where, H = Height of the building from foundation or from top of a rigid basement. Amplification of Approximate Period: 12 | P a g e

BRS Engineering Solution Pvt. Ltd Pulchowk, Lalitpur

STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS REPORT JAW AND JCO OFFICE BUILDING, S I N G H A D U R B A R ,

The approximate fundamental time period calculated using empirical equation in section 5.1.2 shall be increased by a factor of 1.25. Calculation of Period of Vibration for Left wing (ULSX): Floor Floor Force Deflectio weight Wi*di2 Level (kN) n (m) (kN) 7

176.0325

84.3885

0.047914

6

675.6978 2909.993 9 3883.343 5 4290.529 3924.021 1 4385.962 1

454.8432

0.047054

2033.622

0.04091

1890.964

0.034158

1444.39

0.025872

863.2485

0.016579

372.3309

0.007305

5 4 3 2 1

Fi*di

0.404127 1.496048

4.043391 21.40219

4.870248

83.19548

4.530965 2.87191

64.59153 37.36926

1.078569

14.3118

0.234048 ∑ = 15.48591

2.719877 ∑ = 227.6335

Hence, T1 = 0.523233667 Calculation of Period of Vibration for Left wing (ULSY): Floor Floor Force Deflectio weight Wi*di2 Level (kN) n (m) (kN) 176.032 7 84.3885 5 0.047373 0.395052 675.697 6 454.8432 8 0.047254 1.508793 2909.99 5 2033.622 4 0.044992 5.890643 3883.34 4 1890.964 4 0.037479 5.454837 4290.52 3 1444.39 9 0.028467 3.476916 3924.02 2 863.2485 1 0.018331 1.318571 4385.96 1 372.3309 2 0.008533 0.319351 ∑ = 18.36416 Hence, T1 = 0.545914386

Fi*di

3.997736 21.49316 91.49673 70.87142 41.11745 15.82421 3.1771 ∑ = 247.9778

13 | P a g e

BRS Engineering Solution Pvt. Ltd Pulchowk, Lalitpur

STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS REPORT JAW AND JCO OFFICE BUILDING, S I N G H A D U R B A R ,

14 | P a g e

BRS Engineering Solution Pvt. Ltd Pulchowk, Lalitpur

STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS REPORT JAW AND JCO OFFICE BUILDING, S I N G H A D U R B A R ,

Calculation of Period of Vibration for Left wing (SLSX): Floor Floor Force Deflection weight Wi*di2 Level (kN) (m) (kN) 176.032 7 69.1986 0.044236 5 0.344465 675.697 6 372.9714 0.043413 8 1.27348 2909.99 5 1667.57 0.038545 4 4.323427 3883.34 4 1550.59 0.032344 4 4.062499 4290.52 3 1184.4 0.024766 9 2.631616 3924.02 2 707.8637 0.016029 1 1.008194 4385.96 1 305.3113 0.007108 2 0.221595 ∑ = 13.86528 Hence, T1 = 0.562210738 Calculation of Period of Vibration for Left wing (SLSY): Floor Floor Force Deflectio weight Wi*di2 Level (kN) n (m) (kN) 176.032 7 69.1986 0.042817 5 0.32272 675.697 6 372.9714 0.042695 8 1.231705 2909.99 5 1667.57 0.041792 4 5.082512 3883.34 4 1550.59 0.035049 4 4.770425 4290.52 3 1184.4 0.026844 9 3.091757 3924.02 2 707.8637 0.017445 1 1.19419 4385.96 1 305.3113 0.008214 2 0.29592 ∑ = 15.98923 Hence, T1 = 0.582597195

Fi*di

3.061069 16.19181 64.27649 50.15229 29.33284 11.34635 2.170153 ∑ = 176.531

Fi*di

2.962876 15.92401 69.69109 54.34664 31.79403 12.34868 2.507827 ∑ = 189.5752

15 | P a g e

BRS Engineering Solution Pvt. Ltd Pulchowk, Lalitpur

STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS REPORT JAW AND JCO OFFICE BUILDING, S I N G H A D U R B A R ,

16 | P a g e

BRS Engineering Solution Pvt. Ltd Pulchowk, Lalitpur

STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS REPORT JAW AND JCO OFFICE BUILDING, S I N G H A D U R B A R ,

Summary of Time period and Building Height Exponent (K) for Left wing:

SN

LOAD CASE

1

ULS X

2

ULS X

3

SLS X

4

SLS Y

TIME TIME TIME PERIOD PERIOD PERIOD FROM FROM FOR RAYLEIG EMPERICA ANALYSIS H L 0.52323366 0.52323366 0.9539546 7 7 0.54591438 0.54591438 0.9539546 6 6 0.56221073 0.56221073 0.9539546 8 8 0.58259719 0.58259719 0.9539546 5 5

Calculation of Period of Vibration for Right wing (ULSX): Floor Floor Force Deflectio weight Wi*di2 Level (kN) n (m) (kN) 7 6 5 4 3 2 1

279.8806 1099.955 1 2592.170 7 3392.449 7 3406.488 9 3610.323 3 3631.878 4

104.9597

0.03378

582.2561

0.033183

1232.462

0.030093

1106.653

0.026033

847.0894

0.02037

519.1834

0.013493

219.1947

0.006173

K

1.01161 7 1.02295 7 1.03110 5 1.04129 9

Fi*di

0.319369

3.545539

1.211173

19.321

2.34744

37.08849

2.299121

28.8095

1.413478

17.25521

0.657299

7.005342

0.138396 ∑ = 8.386276

1.353089 ∑ = 114.3782

Hence, T1 = 0.543198268

17 | P a g e

BRS Engineering Solution Pvt. Ltd Pulchowk, Lalitpur

STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS REPORT JAW AND JCO OFFICE BUILDING, S I N G H A D U R B A R ,

Calculation of Period of Vibration for Right wing (ULSY): Floor Floor Force Deflectio weight Wi*di2 Level (kN) n (m) (kN) 7 279.8806 104.9597 0.039799 0.44332 6

1099.955 582.2561

5

2592.171 1232.462

4

3392.45

3 2 1

3406.489 847.0894 3610.323 519.1834 3631.878 219.1947

1106.653

Fi*di 4.177291

0.039446 0.03785

1.711516 3.713602

22.96767 46.6487

0.03259 0.025738 0.016823 0.007873

3.603148 2.25661 1.02177 0.225119 ∑ =12.97508

36.06582 21.80239 8.734222 1.72572 ∑ = 142.1218

Hence, T1 = 0.606136015 Calculation of Period of Vibration for Right wing (SLSX): Floor Floor Force Deflectio weight Wi*di2 Fi*di Level (kN) n (m) (kN) 279.880 7 100.7997 0.032441 6 0.294552 3.270043 1099.95 6 559.1789 0.031868 5 1.117081 17.81991 2592.17 5 1183.615 0.0289 1 2.165007 34.20646 4 3392.45 1062.792 0.025001 2.120451 26.57086 3406.48 3 813.5157 0.019563 9 1.303701 15.91481 3610.32 2 498.606 0.012958 3 0.606209 6.460937 3631.87 1 210.5071 0.005928 8 0.127629 1.247886         ∑ = 7.734628 ∑ = 105.4909 Hence, T1 = 0.543197228

18 | P a g e

BRS Engineering Solution Pvt. Ltd Pulchowk, Lalitpur

STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS REPORT JAW AND JCO OFFICE BUILDING, S I N G H A D U R B A R ,

Calculation of Period of Vibration for Right wing (SLSY): Floor Floor Force Deflection weight Wi*di2 Fi*di Level (kN) (m) (kN) 279.880 7 100.7997 0.038222 6 0.408884 3.852766 1099.95 6 559.1789 0.037883 5 1.578569 21.18337 2592.17 5 1183.615 0.03635 1 3.425093 43.02439 4

3392.45 1062.792

0.031298

3406.48 813.5157 0.024717 9 3610.32 2 498.606 0.016157 3 3631.87 1 210.5071 0.007561 8         Hence, T1 = 0.606135115 3

3.323124

33.26326

2.081127

20.10767

0.94247

8.055977

0.20763 ∑ = 11.9669

1.591644 ∑ = 131.0791

Summary of Time period and Building Height Exponent (K) for Right wing:

SN

LOAD CASE

1

ULS X

2

ULS X

3

SLS X

4

SLS Y

TIME TIME TIME PERIOD PERIOD PERIOD FROM FROM FOR RAYLEIG EMPERICA ANALYSIS H L 0.54319826 0.54319826 0.9539546 8 8 0.60613601 0.60613601 0.9539546 5 5 0.54319722 0.54319722 0.9539546 8 8 0.60613511 0.60613511 0.9539546 5 5

K

1.02159 9 1.05306 8 1.02159 9 1.05306 8

4.5.2 Modal Response Spectrum Method (MRSM): 19 | P a g e

BRS Engineering Solution Pvt. Ltd Pulchowk, Lalitpur

STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS REPORT JAW AND JCO OFFICE BUILDING, S I N G H A D U R B A R ,

Response Spectrum method was chosen for the dynamic analysis of the building as per NBC 105:2020, Clause no. 3.2.2. The method may be used for all types of structures and the structures where Equivalent Static Method is not applicable. A three dimensional analysis shall be performed for torsionally sensitive structures.

Fig 3: Spectral Shape Factor, Ch(T) for Modal Response Spectrum Method (Figure 4-2 from NBC 105:2020) Here, left wing and right wing are chosen for this approach

20 | P a g e

BRS Engineering Solution Pvt. Ltd Pulchowk, Lalitpur

STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS REPORT JAW AND JCO OFFICE BUILDING, S I N G H A D U R B A R ,

The scale factors used are as: Block

Scale Factor in X direction

Scale Factor in Y direction

LEFT WING (ULS) RIGHT WING (ULS) LEFT WING (ULS) RIGHT WING (ULS)

3.08594 2.42962 2.53047 2.33332

3.37522 2.48266 2.76768 2.38426

Comparison of Base shears from Static analysis and Dynamic analysis: Block LEFT WING (ULS) RIGHT WING (ULS) LEFT WING (ULS) RIGHT WING (ULS)

Base Shear from Static Analysis(kN) X direction Y direction

Base Shear from Dynamic Analysis(kN) X direction Y direction

7143.7867

7143.7867

7413.7769

7143.7828

4621.5678

4621.5678

4621.1543

4619.751

5857.9051

5857.9051

5857.8952

5857.901

4438.396

4438.396

4437.991

4436.6476

21 | P a g e

BRS Engineering Solution Pvt. Ltd Pulchowk, Lalitpur

4.5

STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS REPORT JAW AND JCO OFFICE BUILDING, S I N G H A D U R B A R ,

Wind Loads Wind and seismic loads shall not be taken to act simultaneously. As seismic load is expected to govern wind load has not been considered in design.

4.6

Soft Storey A soft storey can be detected by comparing the stiffness of adjacent storeys. Soft storeys are present in buildings with open fronts on the ground floor or tall storeys.

Fig 4: Open Ground Storey and Bare Frame

There is no soft storey in the proposed building since no storey level has change in mass and stiffness in considerate amount.

22 | P a g e

BRS Engineering Solution Pvt. Ltd Pulchowk, Lalitpur

5.0

STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS REPORT JAW AND JCO OFFICE BUILDING, S I N G H A D U R B A R ,

LOAD COMBINATIONS

The load combination has been taken as per Nepal National Building code. The load combinations used in ETABS analysis are listed below. Load Combinations for NBC 105:2020 Load factor to be used in combination

Load Combo No. DL+0.3LLo+EQX DL+0.3LLo-EQX DL+0.3LLo+EQY DL+0.3LLo-EQY DL+0.6LLs+EQX DL+0.6LLs-EQX DL+0.6LLS+EQY DL+0.6LLo-EQY 1.2DL+1.5LL DL+LL

6.0

DL 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1.2 1

LIVE STORAGE 0 0 0 0 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.6 1.5 1

LIVE OTHER 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0 0 0 0 1.5 1

EQX 1 -1 0 0 1 -1 0 0 0 0

EQY 0 0 1 -1 0 0 1 -1 0 0

ANALYSIS AND DESIGN PROCEDURE

Space frame analysis using ETABS 2016 software has been undertaken to obtain refined results for all load combinations in accordance with Nepal Building Code. The RCC design shall be based on Nepal building code in reference to IS: 456-2000 Code of practice for plain and reinforced concrete, following Limit state philosophy. Structural design for typical members has been done for the combination of loads that produces maximum stress in the structural elements, and in turn requires maximum reinforcing steel provisions. The design of Columns and Beams is done directly using ETABS 2016 design software. The design of Slab and footings are done by Worksheets in Excel. The size of columns and beams are provided as per requirement.

23 | P a g e

BRS Engineering Solution Pvt. Ltd Pulchowk, Lalitpur

STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS REPORT JAW AND JCO OFFICE BUILDING, S I N G H A D U R B A R ,

6.1 Structure Idealization General Information on Structural Elements of the Building Element Description Grade of Concrete Column

600 mm X 700 mm

M30

Main Beam

650 mm X 400 mm

M30

Secondary Beam

450 mm X 300 mm

M30

Floor Slab

150 mm

M30

Roof Slab

125 mm

M30

Remarks          

   

From Soil Test Report, Foundation Mat M25 Bearing Capacity of Soil=110 KN/m2 3-Dimensional structural analysis will be carried out using structural analysis and design software ETABS. The whole structure will be idealized as a space frame. Slabs, Beams, Walls and Columns in the structure will be modeled as line/shell/membrane elements as applicable. Stiffness of members is modeled considering the effect of cracked sections. As per IS 456 Code of Practice for Plain and Reinforced Concrete member stiffness can be based on cracked section properties and for the calculation of deflection reduced moment of inertia of section shall be used based on cracked section. The property modifiers considered in the analysis are given below, which is based on Table 3-1 of NBC 105:2020. S.N 1 2 3 4

Component Beam Columns Wall- Cracked Wall-Uncracked

Flexural Stiffness 0.35 EcIg 0.70 EcIg 0.5 EcIg 0.8 EcIg

Shear Stiffness 0.4 EcAw 0.4 EcAw 0.4 EcAw 0.4 EcAw

24 | P a g e

BRS Engineering Solution Pvt. Ltd Pulchowk, Lalitpur

7.0

STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS REPORT JAW AND JCO OFFICE BUILDING, S I N G H A D U R B A R ,

MODELING IN ETABS 2016

Fig 5: 3D Model of Left Wing

Fig 6: 3D Model of Right Wing 25 | P a g e

BRS Engineering Solution Pvt. Ltd Pulchowk, Lalitpur

STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS REPORT JAW AND JCO OFFICE BUILDING, S I N G H A D U R B A R ,

Fig 7: Roof Plan of Left Wing

Fig 8: Roof Plan of Right Wing

26 | P a g e

BRS Engineering Solution Pvt. Ltd Pulchowk, Lalitpur

STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS REPORT JAW AND JCO OFFICE BUILDING, S I N G H A D U R B A R ,

Fig 9: Floor Finish in First Floor of Left Wing

Fig 10: Floor Finish in Fourth Floor of Right Wing

27 | P a g e

BRS Engineering Solution Pvt. Ltd Pulchowk, Lalitpur

STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS REPORT JAW AND JCO OFFICE BUILDING, S I N G H A D U R B A R ,

Fig 11: Live Load (LLother) in First Floor of Left Wing

Fig 12: Live Load (LLother) in Fourth Floor of Right Wing

28 | P a g e

BRS Engineering Solution Pvt. Ltd Pulchowk, Lalitpur

STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS REPORT JAW AND JCO OFFICE BUILDING, S I N G H A D U R B A R ,

Fig 13: Roof Live Load in Left Wing

Fig 14: Roof Live Load in Second Story of Academic Building - Block 2 and 3

29 | P a g e

BRS Engineering Solution Pvt. Ltd Pulchowk, Lalitpur

STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS REPORT JAW AND JCO OFFICE BUILDING, S I N G H A D U R B A R ,

Fig 15: Brick Wall Load in Grid C-C of Left Wing

Fig 16: Brick Wall Load in Grid G-G of Right Wing 30 | P a g e

BRS Engineering Solution Pvt. Ltd Pulchowk, Lalitpur

8.0

STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS REPORT JAW AND JCO OFFICE BUILDING, S I N G H A D U R B A R ,

DEFLECTION AND STOREY DRIFT

To control overall deformation due to earthquake load, the criteria given in clause 5.6 of NBC105:2020 is applied. Clause 5.6.3 of NBC 105:2020 specifies limit of 0.025 at ULS (Ultimate Limit State) and 0.006 at SLS (Serviceability Limit State). Furthermore, Clause 5.6.1.1 states that for ultimate state design the design displacement shall be multiplied by Ductility factor. For Left Wing, For ULS (Ultimate Limit State) Maximum drift in the model is 0.00423. For ULS design actual drift: 0.00423*4= 0.01692 which is less than 0.025. The following table shows the story drift in the model: Story Story3 Story2 Story4 Story7 Story3 Story2 Story4 Story5 Story2 Story3 Story2 Story3 Story2 Story3 Story2 Story3 Story2 Story1 Story3 Story4 Story4 Story4

Load Case/Combo Seismic y 3 Seismic y 3 Seismic y 3 SPECY Max Seismic y 1 Seismic y 1 Seismic y 1 Seismic y 3 Seismic x 3 Seismic x 3 SPECX Max Seismic y 2 Seismic x 2 Seismic x 2 Seismic y 2 SPECX Max Seismic x 1 Seismic y 3 Seismic x 1 Seismic y 2 Seismic x 2 Seismic x 3

Directio n Y Y Y X Y Y Y Y X X X Y X X Y X X Y X Y X X

Drift 0.00423 0.00407 0.00377 0.00368 0.00348 0.00336 0.00311 0.00307 0.00299 0.00293 0.00289 0.00287 0.00287 0.00287 0.00285 0.00281 0.00281 0.00277 0.00274 0.00259 0.00256 0.00255

Check PASS PASS PASS PASS PASS PASS PASS PASS PASS PASS PASS PASS PASS PASS PASS PASS PASS PASS PASS PASS PASS PASS 31 | P a g e

BRS Engineering Solution Pvt. Ltd Pulchowk, Lalitpur

Story5 Story4 Story4 Story1 Story1 Story1 Story5 Story1 Story1 Story1 Story5 Story5 Story7 Story5 Story5 Story3 Story2 Story4 Story6 Story6 Story6 Story6 Story7 Story5 Story7 Story6 Story6 Story1 Story7 Story7 Base Story7 Base Base

STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS REPORT JAW AND JCO OFFICE BUILDING, S I N G H A D U R B A R ,

Seismic y 1 SPECX Max Seismic x 1 Seismic y 1 Seismic y 2 Seismic x 3 Seismic y 2 SPECX Max Seismic x 2 Seismic x 1 Seismic x 2 Seismic x 3 Seismic y 3 Seismic x 1 SPECX Max SPECY Max SPECY Max SPECY Max Seismic x 3 Seismic x 1 SPECX Max Seismic x 2 Seismic x 3 SPECY Max SPECX Max Seismic y 2 Seismic y 1 SPECY Max Seismic x 2 Seismic y 1 Seismic y 2 Seismic x 1 Seismic y 1 Seismic y 3

Y X X Y Y X Y X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X Y Y X X X Y X Y Y

0.00253 0.00243 0.00238 0.0023 0.00229 0.00224 0.00218 0.00217 0.00213 0.00211 0.0021 0.00204 0.00196 0.00195 0.00193 0.00176 0.00167 0.0016 0.00156 0.00148 0.00146 0.00143 0.00134 0.00133 0.00132 0.00119 0.00116 0.00113 0.00101 0.00094 0.00082 0.00075 0.00074 0.00066

PASS PASS PASS PASS PASS PASS PASS PASS PASS PASS PASS PASS PASS PASS PASS PASS PASS PASS PASS PASS PASS PASS PASS PASS PASS PASS PASS PASS PASS PASS PASS PASS PASS PASS 32 | P a g e

BRS Engineering Solution Pvt. Ltd Pulchowk, Lalitpur

Story7 Story6 Story6 Base Base Base Base Base

STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS REPORT JAW AND JCO OFFICE BUILDING, S I N G H A D U R B A R ,

Seismic y 2 SPECY Max Seismic y 3 Seismic x 3 SPECX Max Seismic x 2 Seismic x 1 SPECY Max

X X X X X X X X

0.00042 0.00029 0.00022 0.00016 0.00016 0.00015 0.00015 0.00013

PASS PASS PASS PASS PASS PASS PASS PASS

For Right Wing, For ULS (Ultimate Limit State) Maximum drift in the model is 0.00333 For ULS design actual drift: 0.00333*4= 0.01332 which is less than 0.025. The following table shows the story drift in the model: Story Story2 Story3 Story2 Story3 Story2 Story4 Story3 Story1 Story2 Story4 Story2 Story2 Story2 Story3 Story1 Story3 Story1 Story4

Load Case/Combo Seismic y 2 Seismic y 2 Seismic y 1 Seismic y 1 Seismic y 3 Seismic y 2 Seismic y 3 Seismic y 2 Seismic x 2 Seismic y 1 Seismic x 3 Seismic x 1 SPEC X Max Seismic x 2 Seismic y 3 Seismic x 3 Seismic y 1 Seismic y 3

Directio n Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y X Y X X X X Y X Y Y

Drift 0.00333 0.00321 0.00293 0.00283 0.00267 0.0026 0.0025 0.0024 0.00237 0.00231 0.00229 0.00222 0.0022 0.00215 0.00215 0.00214 0.00211 0.00204

Check PASS PASS PASS PASS PASS PASS PASS PASS PASS PASS PASS PASS PASS PASS PASS PASS PASS PASS 33 | P a g e

BRS Engineering Solution Pvt. Ltd Pulchowk, Lalitpur

Story3 Story3 Story1 Story5 Story1 Story1 Story1 Story4 Story4 Story4 Story5 Story4 Story7 Story5 Story5 Story5 Story5 Story5 Story6 Story6 Story7 Story6 Story6 Story6 Story6 Story6 Story2 Story7 Story7 Story3 Story7 Story4 Story1 Base

STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS REPORT JAW AND JCO OFFICE BUILDING, S I N G H A D U R B A R ,

Seismic x 1 SPEC X Max Seismic x 2 Seismic y 2 Seismic x 1 SPEC X Max Seismic x 3 Seismic x 3 Seismic x 2 Seismic x 1 Seismic y 1 SPEC X Max SPEC Y Max Seismic y 3 Seismic x 3 Seismic x 1 Seismic x 2 SPEC X Max Seismic x 3 Seismic x 1 Seismic y 2 Seismic x 2 SPEC X Max Seismic y 2 Seismic y 1 Seismic y 3 SPEC Y Max Seismic x 3 Seismic x 2 SPEC Y Max Seismic y 1 SPEC Y Max SPEC Y Max Seismic y 3

X X X Y X X X X X X Y X X Y X X X X X X X X X Y Y Y X X X X Y X X Y

0.00201 0.00196 0.00191 0.00181 0.00181 0.0018 0.00179 0.00177 0.00171 0.00165 0.00164 0.00155 0.00155 0.00146 0.00132 0.00124 0.00119 0.00115 0.00111 0.00105 0.00103 0.00099 0.00096 0.00095 0.00089 0.00089 0.0008 0.00078 0.00077 0.00074 0.00061 0.00058 0.00058 0.00058

PASS PASS PASS PASS PASS PASS PASS PASS PASS PASS PASS PASS PASS PASS PASS PASS PASS PASS PASS PASS PASS PASS PASS PASS PASS PASS PASS PASS PASS PASS PASS PASS PASS PASS 34 | P a g e

BRS Engineering Solution Pvt. Ltd Pulchowk, Lalitpur

Story7 Base Base Story7 Story7 Story5 Story6 Base Base Base Base Base

STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS REPORT JAW AND JCO OFFICE BUILDING, S I N G H A D U R B A R ,

SPEC X Max Seismic y 1 Seismic y 2 Seismic x 1 Seismic y 3 SPEC Y Max SPEC Y Max Seismic x 2 SPEC X Max Seismic x 3 Seismic x 1 SPEC Y Max

X Y Y X Y X X X X X X X

0.00056 0.00053 0.00049 0.00049 0.00044 0.0004 0.00025 0.00016 0.00015 0.00015 0.00015 9.20E05

PASS PASS PASS PASS PASS PASS PASS PASS PASS PASS PASS PASS

35 | P a g e

BRS Engineering Solution Pvt. Ltd Pulchowk, Lalitpur

STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS REPORT JAW AND JCO OFFICE BUILDING, S I N G H A D U R B A R ,

For Left Wing, For SLS (Serviceability Limit State) Maximum drift in the model is 0.00367 which is less than 0.006. The following table shows the story drift in the model: Load Directio Story Drift Case/Combo n Story7 SPECY-SLS Max X 0.00367 Story3 Seismic y-SLS 3 Y 0.00348 Story2 Seismic y-SLS 3 Y 0.00335 Story4 Seismic y-SLS 3 Y 0.00311 Story2 SPECX-SLS Max X 0.00288 Story3 Seismic y-SLS 1 Y 0.00287 Story3 SPECX-SLS Max X 0.0028 Story2 Seismic y-SLS 1 Y 0.00276 Story4 Seismic y-SLS 1 Y 0.00256 Story5 Seismic y-SLS 3 Y 0.00253 Story2 Seismic x-SLS 3 X 0.00246 Story4 SPECX-SLS Max X 0.00242 Story3 Seismic x-SLS 3 X 0.00241 Story3 Seismic y-SLS 2 Y 0.00236 Story2 Seismic x-SLS 2 X 0.00236 Story3 Seismic x-SLS 2 X 0.00236 Story2 Seismic y-SLS 2 Y 0.00235 Story2 Seismic x-SLS 1 X 0.00231 Story1 Seismic y-SLS 3 Y 0.00227 Story3 Seismic x-SLS 1 X 0.00225 Story1 SPECX-SLS Max X 0.00216 Story4 Seismic y-SLS 2 Y 0.00213 Story4 Seismic x-SLS 2 X 0.00211 Story4 Seismic x-SLS 3 X 0.0021 Story5 Seismic y-SLS 1 Y 0.00208 Story4 Seismic x-SLS 1 X 0.00196 Story5 SPECX-SLS Max X 0.00193 Story1 Seismic y-SLS 1 Y 0.00189 Story1 Seismic y-SLS 2 Y 0.00188 Story1 Seismic x-SLS 3 X 0.00184 Story5 Seismic y-SLS 2 Y 0.0018 Story3 SPECY-SLS Max X 0.00175

Check PASS PASS PASS PASS PASS PASS PASS PASS PASS PASS PASS PASS PASS PASS PASS PASS PASS PASS PASS PASS PASS PASS PASS PASS PASS PASS PASS PASS PASS PASS PASS PASS 36 | P a g e

BRS Engineering Solution Pvt. Ltd Pulchowk, Lalitpur

Story1 Story1 Story5 Story5 Story2 Story7 Story5 Story4 Story6 Story5 Story7 Story6 Story6 Story6 Story1 Story7 Story6 Story6 Story7 Story7 Base Story7 Base Base Story7 Story6 Story6 Base Base Base Base Base

STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS REPORT JAW AND JCO OFFICE BUILDING, S I N G H A D U R B A R ,

Seismic x-SLS 2 Seismic x-SLS 1 Seismic x-SLS 2 Seismic x-SLS 3 SPECY-SLS Max Seismic y-SLS 3 Seismic x-SLS 1 SPECY-SLS Max SPECX-SLS Max SPECY-SLS Max SPECX-SLS Max Seismic x-SLS 3 Seismic x-SLS 1 Seismic x-SLS 2 SPECY-SLS Max Seismic x-SLS 3 Seismic y-SLS 2 Seismic y-SLS 1 Seismic x-SLS 2 Seismic y-SLS 1 Seismic y-SLS 2 Seismic x-SLS 1 Seismic y-SLS 1 Seismic y-SLS 3 Seismic y-SLS 2 SPECY-SLS Max Seismic y-SLS 3 SPECX-SLS Max Seismic x-SLS 3 SPECY-SLS Max Seismic x-SLS 2 Seismic x-SLS 1

X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X Y Y X X Y X Y Y X X X X X X X X

0.00175 0.00174 0.00173 0.00168 0.00167 0.00161 0.00161 0.00159 0.00146 0.00132 0.00131 0.00129 0.00122 0.00118 0.00113 0.0011 0.00098 0.00096 0.00083 0.00077 0.00067 0.00062 0.00061 0.00055 0.00035 0.00029 0.00018 0.00016 0.00013 0.00013 0.00012 0.00012

PASS PASS PASS PASS PASS PASS PASS PASS PASS PASS PASS PASS PASS PASS PASS PASS PASS PASS PASS PASS PASS PASS PASS PASS PASS PASS PASS PASS PASS PASS PASS PASS

37 | P a g e

BRS Engineering Solution Pvt. Ltd Pulchowk, Lalitpur

STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS REPORT JAW AND JCO OFFICE BUILDING, S I N G H A D U R B A R ,

For Right Wing, For SLS (Serviceability Limit State) Maximum drift in the model is 0.00119 which is less than 0.006. The following table shows the story drift in the model: Story

Load Case/Combo

Direction

Drift

Check

Story5 Story4 Story2 Story3

Seismic x- SLS 1 Seismic x- SLS 1 Seismic y- SLS 2 Seismic y- SLS 2

X X Y Y

0.00119 0.0016 0.00316 0.00311

PASS PASS PASS PASS

Story2 Story3 Story2 Story3 Story4 Story2 Story2 Story4 Story7 Story2 Story2 Story3 Story3 Story3 Story4 Story3 Story1 Story4 Story5 Story4 Story4 Story1 Story5 Story1 Story1

Seismic y- SLS 1 Seismic y- SLS 1 Seismic y- SLS 3 Seismic y- SLS 3 Seismic y- SLS 2 SPEC X- SLS Max Seismic x- SLS 2 Seismic y- SLS 1 SPEC Y-SLS Max Seismic x- SLS 3 Seismic x- SLS 1 SPEC X- SLS Max Seismic x- SLS 2 Seismic x- SLS 3 Seismic y- SLS 3 Seismic x- SLS 1 Seismic y- SLS 2 Seismic x- SLS 3 Seismic y- SLS 2 SPEC X- SLS Max Seismic x- SLS 2 Seismic y- SLS 1 Seismic y- SLS 1 Seismic y- SLS 3 SPEC X- SLS Max

Y Y Y Y Y X X Y X X X X X X Y X Y X Y X X Y Y Y X

0.00277 0.00274 0.0026 0.00253 0.00252 0.00227 0.00224 0.00224 0.00219 0.00216 0.0021 0.00209 0.00208 0.00207 0.00205 0.00194 0.00184 0.00172 0.00172 0.00169 0.00166 0.0016 0.00155 0.00152 0.00152

PASS PASS PASS PASS PASS PASS PASS PASS PASS PASS PASS PASS PASS PASS PASS PASS PASS PASS PASS PASS PASS PASS PASS PASS PASS 38 | P a g e

BRS Engineering Solution Pvt. Ltd Pulchowk, Lalitpur

Story1 Story5 Story1 Story1 Story5 Story5 Story5 Story2 Story6 Story3 Story6 Story6 Story7 Story6 Story6 Story6 Story6 Story7 Story4 Story7 Story7 Story1 Story7 Story5 Story7 Story7 Story6

STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS REPORT JAW AND JCO OFFICE BUILDING, S I N G H A D U R B A R ,

Seismic x- SLS 2 Seismic y- SLS 3 Seismic x- SLS 1 Seismic x- SLS 3 Seismic x- SLS 3 SPEC X- SLS Max Seismic x- SLS 2 SPEC Y-SLS Max Seismic x- SLS 3 SPEC Y-SLS Max SPEC X- SLS Max Seismic x- SLS 1 Seismic y- SLS 2 Seismic x- SLS 2 Seismic y- SLS 2 Seismic y- SLS 1 Seismic y- SLS 3 SPEC X- SLS Max SPEC Y-SLS Max Seismic x- SLS 3 Seismic x- SLS 2 SPEC Y-SLS Max Seismic y- SLS 1 SPEC Y-SLS Max Seismic x- SLS 1 Seismic y- SLS 3 SPEC Y-SLS Max

X Y X X X X X X X X X X X X Y Y Y X X X X X Y X X Y X

0.00151 0.00143 0.00142 0.00136 0.00126 0.00123 0.00113 0.00106 0.00104 0.00101 0.00099 0.00098 0.00093 0.00092 0.0009 0.00085 0.00084 0.00083 0.00079 0.00067 0.00066 0.00066 0.00054 0.00052 0.0004 0.00037 0.00031

PASS PASS PASS PASS PASS PASS PASS PASS PASS PASS PASS PASS PASS PASS PASS PASS PASS PASS PASS PASS PASS PASS PASS PASS PASS PASS PASS

39 | P a g e

BRS Engineering Solution Pvt. Ltd Pulchowk, Lalitpur

9.0

STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS REPORT JAW AND JCO OFFICE BUILDING, S I N G H A D U R B A R ,

MODAL PARTICIPATING MASS RATIOS

For Left Wing

Modal Modal Modal Modal Modal Modal

1 2 3 4 5 6

Period sec 0.744 0.695 0.661 0.212 0.206 0.184

Modal

7

0.121

0.026

Modal Modal Modal Modal Modal

8 9 10 11 12

0.107 0.098 0.091 0.086 0.08

0.0001 0.0022 0.0214 0.0018 0.0001

Modal

13

0.065

0.0172

Modal

14

0.059

Modal

15

0.054

0.0001 4.89E05

Modal

16

0.052

Modal

17

0.045

Modal

18

0.042

Modal

19

0.037

Modal Modal Modal Modal Modal

20 21 22 23 24

0.032 0.031 0.028 0.026 0.019

Case

Mode

Sum UX

Sum UY

0.4739 0.0045 0.212 0.0064 0.1109 0.0212 2.23E05 0.0428 0.0002 0.0001 0.0087 0.0259 4.17E05 0.0224

0.0084 0.6076 0.6697 0.7545 0.7693 0.7847

0.4739 0.4784 0.6904 0.6968 0.8076 0.8288

0.8107

0.8288

0.8108 0.813 0.8344 0.8362 0.8364

0.8716 0.8718 0.8719 0.8806 0.9065

0.8536

0.9065

0.8536

0.9289

0.0159

0.8537

0.9449

2.45E05

0.8578

0.9449

0.0089

0.8578

0.9537

0.0221

0.8578

0.9758

0.0137

0.8578

0.9895

0.0025 0.0079 0 0 2.33E-

0.969 0.9997 0.9997 0.9997 0.9998

0.992 0.9999 0.9999 0.9999 0.9999

UX

UY

0.0084 0.5992 0.062 0.0848 0.0149 0.0153

0.0041 2.38E06 4.85E06 5.79E06 0.1113 0.0307 0 0 2.81E-

40 | P a g e

BRS Engineering Solution Pvt. Ltd Pulchowk, Lalitpur

STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS REPORT JAW AND JCO OFFICE BUILDING, S I N G H A D U R B A R ,

05 1.04E05

Modal

25

0.018

Modal

26

0.018

Modal

27

0.017

Modal

28

0.016

Modal

29

0.016

0.0001

Modal

30

0.015

3.07E06

06 1.31E05 6.47E06 1.41E05 5.90E06 5.70E06 5.71E06

0.0001 4.10E05 3.43E05

0.9998

0.9999

0.9998

1

0.9999

1

0.9999

1

0.9999

1

0.9999

1

Sum UX 0.0083 0.6781 0.6941 0.6986 0.7887 0.7895 0.8241 0.8243 0.8246 0.8263 0.8278

Sum UY 0.6548 0.6695 0.7057 0.8057 0.8109 0.8161 0.8163 0.8655 0.8676 0.8683 0.8685

0.828

0.8685

0.8449 0.845 0.8495 0.8569

0.8688 0.8999 0.9006 0.9016

0.0233

0.8569

0.9249

0.0001 6.55E06 0

0.8599

0.925

0.8603

0.925

0.8603

0.925

For Right Wing

Modal Modal Modal Modal Modal Modal Modal Modal Modal Modal Modal

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11

Period sec 0.761 0.677 0.645 0.235 0.225 0.203 0.131 0.122 0.114 0.107 0.095

Modal

12

0.092

0.0003

Modal Modal Modal Modal

13 14 15 16

0.09 0.079 0.07 0.069

Modal

17

0.059

Modal

18

0.057

0.0168 0.0002 0.0045 0.0074 4.21E05 0.003

Modal

19

0.057

0.0004

Modal

20

0.056

0

Case

Mode

UX

UY

0.0083 0.6698 0.016 0.0044 0.0901 0.0008 0.0346 0.0002 0.0003 0.0018 0.0014

0.6548 0.0148 0.0361 0.1 0.0052 0.0052 0.0001 0.0493 0.0021 0.0007 0.0001 2.31E05 0.0003 0.0312 0.0007 0.001

41 | P a g e

BRS Engineering Solution Pvt. Ltd Pulchowk, Lalitpur

STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS REPORT JAW AND JCO OFFICE BUILDING, S I N G H A D U R B A R ,

Modal

21

0.052

Modal

22

0.052

4.38E05 0.0001

Modal

23

0.051

0

Modal

24

0.048

Modal

25

0.043

Modal Modal Modal

26 27 28

0.041 0.036 0.032

4.40E06 7.14E06 0.0006 0.1362 0.0014

Modal

29

0.023

0

Modal

30

0.019

Modal

31

0.017

Modal

32

0.016

0 1.40E05 3.55E05

0.0007

0.8604

0.9257

0.0031 1.80E06

0.8605

0.9288

0.8605

0.9288

0.0164

0.8605

0.9452

0.0251

0.8605

0.9703

0.0149 0.0003 0.0129 4.54E06 0 9.39E06

0.8611 0.9972 0.9986

0.9852 0.9855 0.9984

0.9986

0.9984

0.9986

0.9984

0.9987

0.9984

0

0.9987

0.9984

42 | P a g e

BRS Engineering Solution Pvt. Ltd Pulchowk, Lalitpur

STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS REPORT JAW AND JCO OFFICE BUILDING, S I N G H A D U R B A R ,

10.0 DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL ELEMENTS 10.1 Design of Column Sample Design of Column 1 General Information of Column to be designed: Block: Left Wing Grid: C/1 ETABS 2016 Concrete Frame Design IS 456:2000 Column Section Design

Column Element Details Type: Ductile Frame (Summary) Unique Station Length Level Element Section ID Combo ID Name Loc (mm) COL 600X700 DL+0.3LLoStory1 C7 7 0 3300 M30 SPECY

LLRF 1

Section Properties Cover (Torsion) b (mm) h (mm) dc (mm) (mm) 700 600 60.6 28.1 Material Properties Lt.Wt Factor Ec (MPa) fck (MPa) fy (MPa) fys (MPa) (Unitless) 27386.13 30 1 500 500 Design Code Parameters 43 | P a g e

BRS Engineering Solution Pvt. Ltd Pulchowk, Lalitpur

STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS REPORT JAW AND JCO OFFICE BUILDING, S I N G H A D U R B A R ,

ɣC 1.5

ɣS 1.15

Axial Force and Biaxial Moment Design For Pu , Mu2 , Mu3 Rebar Design Pu Design Mu2 Design Mu3 Minimum M2 Minimum M3 Area kN kN-m kN-m kN-m kN-m mm² -4038.4639 -436.4963 110.9256 116.4424 102.9808 12738

Major Bend(M3) Minor Bend(M2)

Rebar % % 3.03

Axial Force and Biaxial Moment Factors Initial Additional K Factor Length Moment Moment Unitless mm kN-m kN-m

Minimum Moment kN-m

0.888361

2750

57.9377

0

102.9808

0.95908

2750

-214.255

0

116.4424

Major, Vu2 Minor, Vu3

Shear Design for Vu2 , Vu3 Shear Vu Shear Vc Shear Vs Shear Vp Rebar Asv /s kN kN kN kN mm²/m 119.898 447.3693 151.0326 119.898 775.9 189.0676 452.096 153.4565 76.374 665.06 Joint Shear Check/Design Joint Shear Shear Shear Shear Force VTop Vu,Tot Vc kN kN kN kN

Major Shear, Vu2 Minor Shear, Vu3

Joint Area cm²

Shear Ratio Unitless

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

(1.1) Beam/Column Capacity Ratio Major Minor Ratio Ratio N/A N/A Additional Moment Reduction Factor k (IS 39.7.1.1)

44 | P a g e

BRS Engineering Solution Pvt. Ltd Pulchowk, Lalitpur

Ag cm² 4200

STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS REPORT JAW AND JCO OFFICE BUILDING, S I N G H A D U R B A R ,

Asc cm²

Puz Pb Pu k kN kN kN Unitless 10446.741 3105.05 127.4 1 8 2 4038.4639

Additional Moment (IS 39.7.1) Section KL/Dept KL/Dept KL/Dept Ma Consider Length Depth h h h Moment (kNMa Factor (mm) Ratio Limit Exceeded m) Major Bending Yes 0.833 600 (M3 ) Minor Bending Yes 0.833 700 (M2 ) For main bars:  Ast(required) = 12738 mm2  Provide 4-20mmφ + 8-16mmφ bars  Ast (provided) = 2865.14 mm2  Here, Ast(provided) > Ast(required)

4.072

12

No

0

3.768

12

No

0

OK

For lateral ties (IS 456:2000) Clause 26.5.3.2(c):  Spacing shall be less than the least of: i. Least lateral dimension = 500 mm ii. 16 φ = 16 x 25 = 400 mm iii. 300 mm  Provide lateral ties 8/10φ @100mm c/c at edges and 8/10φ @150mm c/c at mid-span. All the columns are designed in a similar way. Please Refer Structural Drawings for further details.

45 | P a g e

BRS Engineering Solution Pvt. Ltd Pulchowk, Lalitpur

STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS REPORT JAW AND JCO OFFICE BUILDING, S I N G H A D U R B A R ,

10.2 Design of Beam Sample Design of Beam 1 General Information of Column to be designed: Block: Right Wing Grid: G/10-11 ETABS 2016 Concrete Frame Design IS 456:2000 Beam Section Design

Beam Element Details Type: Ductile Frame (Summary) Unique Station Length Level Element Section ID Combo ID Name Loc (mm) Beam 650*450 DL+0.3LLo+ Story1 B40 87 4520 4820 M25 EQX Section Properties b (mm) h (mm) bf (mm) ds (mm) dct (mm) 450 650 450 0 25

LLRF 1

dcb (mm) 25

Material Properties Lt.Wt Factor Ec (MPa) fck (MPa) fy (MPa) fys (MPa) (Unitless) 27386.13 30 1 500 500 Design Code Parameters ɣC ɣS 1.5 1.15 46 | P a g e

BRS Engineering Solution Pvt. Ltd Pulchowk, Lalitpur

STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS REPORT JAW AND JCO OFFICE BUILDING, S I N G H A D U R B A R ,

Factored Forces and Moments Factored Factored Factored Factored Mu3 Tu Vu2 Pu kN-m kN-m kN kN -231.005 16.5565 149.7178 0.9724 Design Moments, Mu3 & Mt Factored Factored Positive Negative Moment Mt Moment Moment kN-m kN-m kN-m kN-m -231.005 23.8068 0 -254.8118 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 -254.8118 975 0 975 769 Axis) Bottom (-2 0 487 0 0 487 Axis) 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 210.0939 118.2291 150.7324 155.0284 668.31 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 149.717 16.5565 420 620 443.85 8

47 | P a g e

BRS Engineering Solution Pvt. Ltd Pulchowk, Lalitpur

STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS REPORT JAW AND JCO OFFICE BUILDING, S I N G H A D U R B A R ,

From the obtained data, the rebars for the beam are calculated as follows: Left 942 mm2 Top Reinf. Bar Area Ast (required) Bottom Reinf. Bar Area

 

Middle

769 mm2

Right

976 mm2

Left

809 mm2

Middle

769 mm2

Right

769 mm2    

Provide Top Bars: 3-16φ (TH.) Bottom Bars: 3-16φ (TH.) Left Top Reinf. Bar Area Ast(provided) Bottom Reinf. Bar Area

603.19 mm2

Middle

603.19 mm2

Right

603.19 mm2

Left

603.19 mm2

Middle

603.19 mm2

Right

603.19 mm2

All the beams are designed in a similar way. The design results are summarized and tabulated in the adjacent tables.

48 | P a g e

BRS Engineering Solution Pvt. Ltd Pulchowk, Lalitpur

STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS REPORT JAW AND JCO OFFICE BUILDING, S I N G H A D U R B A R ,

10.3 Design of Slab Sample Design of Slab for Left Wing General Information of Slab to be designed: 1.General information: Concrete Grade= Steel Grade=   As per IS 456:2000, Case No.= Type of panel=

M Fe

25 500

 

4 Two Adjacent Edges Discontinuous

2.Thickness of slab and durability consideration: Short Span, lx = 3500 Long Span,ly = 6000 Approx L/d permissible= 28 Approx d= 125.00 Adopting, overall depth(D)= 150 Assuming, clear cover= 20 and diameter of bar= 10 Effective depth of slab(d)= 125       Effective short span (Lx)= 3625 Effective long span (Ly)= 6125 Ly/Lx= 1.69 Hence, it is a two way slab.

           

mm mm mm mm mm mm mm mm mm

3.Calculation of Design Load: Self weight =

3.75

kN/m2

Finishing &Partition=

1.5

kN/m2

Live Load =

2

kN/m2

Total Load =

7.25

kN/m2

Factored load = 10.88 kN/m2 Considering unit width of Slab, w= 10.88 kN/m

49 | P a g e

BRS Engineering Solution Pvt. Ltd Pulchowk, Lalitpur

STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS REPORT JAW AND JCO OFFICE BUILDING, S I N G H A D U R B A R ,

4.Moment and Reinforcement Calculation: Moments considered Support (-ve) Shorter Span mid span(+ve ) Support (-ve) Longer Span mid span(+ve ) Hence,     the moment to be considered (Mu)= Solving, Mu=0.87*fy*Ast*d*(1-Ast*fy/bd.fck) 2 Ast= 208.7 mm /m Also, Minimum mm2/m Ast(0.25%)= 312.5 2 Hence, Limiting Ast= 312.5 mm /m dia bars @ Providing 10 2 Ast provided= 550 mm /m Provided Ast is sufficient 5. Check for Deflection: shorter span of critical slab= spacing of bars= overall depth of slab= eff depth of slab= % Tension reinforcement= fs= From graph Fig 4 IS 456-2000, Modification factor = Basic L/d= Permissible L/d ratio= Provided L/d ratio=

3625 150 150 125 0.440% 165

Moment (kN.m) 10.970 8.801 6.264 4.665

Coefficient(α) 0.082 0.062 0.047 0.035  

  10.970

kN.m        

150

c/c    

 

mm mm mm mm

1.8 26.000 46.8 29.00

OK

50 | P a g e

BRS Engineering Solution Pvt. Ltd Pulchowk, Lalitpur

STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS REPORT JAW AND JCO OFFICE BUILDING, S I N G H A D U R B A R ,

6. Check for Shear shorter span of critical slab= overall depth of slab= eff depth of slab= Vu= Wu(0.5Lx-d) = Tv =

3625 150 125 18.36 0.14688

mm mm mm kN/m Mpa

Tc

=

0.4 MPa

k kTc

= =

1.3 0.52 Mpa

Table 19, IS456 IS456, 40.2.1.1 OK

Design Summary of Slab Hence, Provide 10 mmφ bars @ 150mm c/c in X-direction And, 10 mmφ bars @ 150mm c/c in Y-direction. Please Refer Structural Drawings for further details.

51 | P a g e

BRS Engineering Solution Pvt. Ltd Pulchowk, Lalitpur

STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS REPORT JAW AND JCO OFFICE BUILDING, S I N G H A D U R B A R ,

10.4 Design of Staircase

DESIGN OF DOG-LEGGED STAIRCASE AS PER IS 456:2000 1) DESIGN DATA: Density of concrete

25

KN/m3

Compressive strength of concrete (fck) Tensile strength of steel (fy)

30

N/mm2

500

N/mm2

Width of flight Projected length of flight Projected clear span of staircase well Riser height for flight Tread width for flight Live load considered

2.18 3 3

m m m

150 300 4

mm mm KN/m2

Floor finish considered

1.5

KN/m2

2) CALCULATION FOR EFFECTIVE SPAN & DEPTH: Clear cover 20

As per Cl 33.1

Assume dia of main bar Assume dia of distribution bar Area of main bar

16 10 201

mm mm mm2

Area of distribution bar

78.5

mm2

Effective projected span of staircase well

3

m

Assume overall depth of waist slab Take effective depth of waist slab (d)

180

mm

152

mm

mm

IS 456, table 16

52 | P a g e

BRS Engineering Solution Pvt. Ltd Pulchowk, Lalitpur

STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS REPORT JAW AND JCO OFFICE BUILDING, S I N G H A D U R B A R ,

3) LOAD CALCULATION: For

2.18

m width of flight 1) load on front landing: Floor finish Self weigth Total load Design load

3 9.81 21.8 32.700

KN/m KN/m KN/m KN/m

2) load on flight: a) Inclined slab Self weigth on plan

10.968

KN/m

3 8.72 4.088 27.045 40.568

KN/m KN/m KN/m KN/m KN/m

9 3 9.81 21.8 32.700

KN/m KN/m KN/m KN/m KN/m

b) Step section Floor finish Live load self weigth Total load Design load   1) load on end landing: Live load Floor finish Self weigth Total load Design load

4) CALCULATION OF SUPPORT RXN & MAX. MOMENT:   Reaction at suppot A: 60.852 KN Reaction at suppot B: 60.852 KN Let X be the distance from support A at which maximum bending moment occurs X 1.500 m   Maximum moment on waist 45.639 KNm 53 | P a g e

BRS Engineering Solution Pvt. Ltd Pulchowk, Lalitpur

STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS REPORT JAW AND JCO OFFICE BUILDING, S I N G H A D U R B A R ,

slab Maximum moment for front landing Maximum moment for end landing   Maximum Bending Moment   4) CHECK FOR DEPTH:   Required depth of landing/waist slab

0.000

KNm

0.000

KNm

45.639

KNm

As per Annex G-1.1©, Cl 38.1 72.436

mm

Safe

5) CALCULATION FOR REINFORCEMENT:   Minimum reinforcement

As per Annex G-1.1(b)

470.88

mm2

Required area of reinforcement

716.035

mm2

Required spacing of main bar Required spacing of distribution bar   Provide: Main bar

280.713 166.709

mm-C/C mm-C/C

16

mm dia bar @

150

Distribution bar

10

mm dia bar @

150

Ast provided

1340.000

mm2

% of reinforcement provided

0.341

%

  6) CHECK FOR SHEAR: Asx100/bd K ζc

As per Cl 40.2, table 19 ,20 0.404 1.24 0.35

Maximum shear stress : ζv

0.184

mm C/ C mm C/ C

N/mm2 54 | P a g e

BRS Engineering Solution Pvt. Ltd Pulchowk, Lalitpur

STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS REPORT JAW AND JCO OFFICE BUILDING, S I N G H A D U R B A R ,

Design shear strength : ζ'c

0.434

N/mm2

Maximum shear strength : ζcmax

3.5

N/mm2

7) CHECK FOR DEFLECTION: Effective span of staircase well Effective depth of waist slab

As per Cl 26.2.1 3 152.000

m mm

fs

154.963

N/mm2

leff/d

19.737

Basic value:α Modification factor: β γ

23

Cl 23.2.1 (a)

1 1.6

λ

1

δ

1

αβγλδ

36.8

Cl 23.2.1 (b) Cl 23.2.1 (c)fig 4 Cl 23.2.1 (d)fig 5 Cl 23.2.1 (e)fig 6 Safe

Safe

7) DEVELOPMENT As per Cl 26.2.1 LENGTH: Stress in bar at the section considered at 0.87*fy design load (σs) Development length(Ld) φx0.87xfy/4ζbd ζbd

2.4

Tension reinforcement Compression reinforcement

725.000 580.000

mm mm

Provide development: Tension reinforcement Compression reinforcement

600 500

mm mm

55 | P a g e

BRS Engineering Solution Pvt. Ltd Pulchowk, Lalitpur

STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS REPORT JAW AND JCO OFFICE BUILDING, S I N G H A D U R B A R ,

10.5 Design of Shear wall Sample Design of Shear wall Block: Left Wing Grid: C/1 Story: Ground Floor ETABS 2016 Shear Wall Design IS 456:2000 Pier Design

Story ID Pier ID Story1

P1

Pier Details Centroid Y (mm) 10610

Centroid X (mm) 0

Length (mm) 2000

Thickness (mm) 300

LLRF 0.9

Material Properties Lt.Wt Factor Ec (MPa) fck (MPa) fy (MPa) fys (MPa) (Unitless) 27386.13 30 1 500 500 Design Code Parameters ΓS

ΓC

IPMAX

IPMIN

PMAX

1.15

1.5

0.04

0.0025

0.8

MinEcc Major Yes

MinEcc Minor Yes

Pier Leg Location, Length and Thickness Station Left X1 Left Y1 Right X2 Right Y2 Length Thickness ID Location mm mm mm mm mm mm Top Leg 1 0 9610 0 11610 2000 300 Bottom Leg 1 0 9610 0 11610 2000 300 Flexural Design for Pu, Mu2 and Mu3 Station Required Required Current Flexural Pu Mu2 Mu3 Pier Ag Locatio Rebar Area Reinf Reinf Combo kN kN-m kN-m mm² n (mm²) Ratio Ratio DL+0.6LLs811.017 Top 5770 0.0096 0.003 1426.685 600000 SPECY 4.6196 5 3 Bottom 18322 0.0305 0.003 DL+0.6LLs64.062 3493.33 600000 SPECY 3203.114 3 44 56 | P a g e

BRS Engineering Solution Pvt. Ltd Pulchowk, Lalitpur

STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS REPORT JAW AND JCO OFFICE BUILDING, S I N G H A D U R B A R ,

Station Required Required Current Locatio Rebar Area Reinf Reinf n (mm²) Ratio Ratio

Flexural Combo

Pu kN

Mu2 Mu3 Pier Ag kN-m kN-m mm²

3

Station Location

ID

Rebar mm²/m

Top

Leg 1 1911.36

Bottom

Leg 1 1710.09

Shear Design Pu Mu Vu Vc Vc + Vs Shear Combo kN kN-m kN kN kN DL+0.3LLo1338.817 815.5603 235.213 1338.8173 SPECY 1408.086 3 DL+0.3LLo3507.553 1354.252 366.863 1354.2523 SPECY 3177.387 4 3 9 Boundary Element Check

Station Location

ID

Edge Length (mm)

Top–Left

Leg 1

300

Top–Right Leg 1

300

Bottom– Left

Leg 1

600

Botttom– Right

Leg 1

750

Governing Combo

Pu kN

Mu kN-m

DL+0.3LLo+SP 2623.831 -558.3748 ECY 4 DL+0.3LLo+SP 2623.831 815.5603 ECY 4 DL+0.3LLo+SP 4606.262 3044.436 ECY 3 1 DL+0.3LLo+SP 4606.262 3507.553 ECY 3 4

Stress Comp MPa

Stress Limit MPa

7.16

6

8.45

6

22.9

6

25.21

6

57 | P a g e

BRS Engineering Solution Pvt. Ltd Pulchowk, Lalitpur

STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS REPORT JAW AND JCO OFFICE BUILDING, S I N G H A D U R B A R ,

Design Summary of shear wall OFFICE BLOCK-LEFT WING Ast Ast reqd Length Pier reqd (mm2) of wall Label (mm2) single (mm) layer

dia of bars

spacing (mm) required

spacing (mm)

P1

18313

9156.5

2000

25

107.218665

100

P2 P3 P4 P5 P7

5220 3500 1055 27296 1500

2610 1750 527.5 13648 750

5000 7000 2110 8320 3000

16 16 16 20 16

385.176111 804.247719 804.247719 191.515613 804.247719

150 150 150 150 150

P8

9600

4800

2000

25

204.530772

150

P9 P10 P11 P12 P13 P14 P15 P16 P17 P18 P19

3652 2477 3000 3000 3000 3010 3000 3000 2700 3000 3010

1826 1238.5 1500 1500 1500 1505 1500 1500 1350 1500 1505

5400 3000 6000 6000 6000 6020 6000 6000 5400 6000 6020

16 16 16 16 16 16 16 16 16 16 16

594.597164 487.029301 804.247719 804.247719 804.247719 804.247719 804.247719 804.247719 804.247719 804.247719 804.247719

150 150 150 150 150 150 150 150 150 150 150

Remarks Shear wall Basement Basement Basement Lift Basement Shear wall Basement Basement Basement Basement Basement Basement Basement Basement Basement Basement Basement

58 | P a g e

BRS Engineering Solution Pvt. Ltd Pulchowk, Lalitpur

STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS REPORT JAW AND JCO OFFICE BUILDING, S I N G H A D U R B A R ,

OFFICE BLOCK-RIGHT WING Ast Ast reqd Length Pier reqd (mm2) of wall Label (mm2) single (mm) layer P1 1055 527.5 2110 P2 3500 1750 7000 P3 3500 1750 7000 P4 2410 1205 4820 P5 3000 1500 6000 P6 3000 1500 6000 P7 1500 750 3000 P8 2410 1205 4820 P9 3000 1500 6000 P10 3000 1500 6000 P11 1500 750 3000

dia of bars 16 16 16 16 16 16 16 16 16 16 16

spacing (mm) required 804.247719 804.247719 804.247719 804.247719 804.247719 804.247719 804.247719 804.247719 804.247719 804.247719 804.247719

spacing (mm) 150 150 150 150 150 150 150 150 150 150 150

Remarks Basement Basement Basement Basement Basement Basement Basement Basement Basement Basement Basement

Please refer structural drawings for further details.

59 | P a g e

BRS Engineering Solution Pvt. Ltd Pulchowk, Lalitpur

STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS REPORT JAW AND JCO OFFICE BUILDING, S I N G H A D U R B A R ,

10.6 Design of Footing A) INPUT DATA a) Concrete Grade = 25 MPa b) Rebar Grade = 500 MPa c) Soil subgrade Modulus i)

Soil bearing capacity = 110 kN/m2

ii)

Soil subgrade Modulus = 4520

60 | P a g e

BRS Engineering Solution Pvt. Ltd Pulchowk, Lalitpur

STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS REPORT JAW AND JCO OFFICE BUILDING, S I N G H A D U R B A R ,

11.0 STRONG COLUMN WEAK BEAM CHECK Sample Strong Column Weak Beam Check for Academic Building- Block 1 Grid: 8/B fy= 500 Mpa         fck column 25 Mpa         Fck beam 25 MPa         For Beam,             b= 250 mm         d= 500 mm         2 Ast(top)= 942.48 mm         Ast(bot)= 942.48 mm2         Mu(hog)= 174.08 kN-m         Mu(sag)= 174.08 kN-m         ∑Mb= 348.16 kN-m                       For Column,             b= 500 mm         D= 500 mm         Clear Cover= 40 mm         Fatored Axial Load= 417.34 kN         2 Area of rebar= 2865.14 mm         pt= 1.146 %         Pu/fck*b*D= 0.067           (from Table of fy=500 , d/D= 0.08 pt/fck= Mu/fck*b*D2= 0.08 0.05) Mu= 250 kNm         ∑Mc= 500 kNm                       Result:             1.4∑Mb= 487.42           ∑Mc= 500 kNm         ∑Mc >1.4∑Mb                         Conclusion:             Hence, Strong column weak beam check is satisfied.       61 | P a g e

BRS Engineering Solution Pvt. Ltd Pulchowk, Lalitpur

STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS REPORT JAW AND JCO OFFICE BUILDING, S I N G H A D U R B A R ,

Sample Strong Column Weak Beam Check for Academic Building- Block 2 and 3 Grid: 2/H fy= 500 Mpa fck Beam 25 Mpa fck column 25 Beam b= 250 mm d= 500 mm Ast(top)= 603.19 mm2 Ast(bot)= 603.19 mm2 Mu(hog)= 118.532 kN-m Mu(sag)= 118.532 kN-m ∑Mb= 237.065 kN-m Column b= D= Clear Cover= Fatored Axial Load= Area of rebar= pt= Pu/fck*b*D= Mu/fck*b*D2= Mu= ∑Mc= Result: 1.4∑Mb= ∑Mc= ∑Mc >1.4∑Mb

400 mm 400 mm 40 mm 252.54 3769.91 2.35619 0.06314 0.12 192 384

kN mm2 % (from Table of fy=500 , d/D= 0.1 pt/fck= 0.09) kNm kNm

331.89 384 kNm

Conclusion: Hence, Strong column weak beam check is satisfied.

62 | P a g e

BRS Engineering Solution Pvt. Ltd Pulchowk, Lalitpur

STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS REPORT JAW AND JCO OFFICE BUILDING, S I N G H A D U R B A R ,

ANNEX ANNEX 1: Seismic Gap Assessment

63 | P a g e

BRS Engineering Solution Pvt. Ltd Pulchowk, Lalitpur

STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS REPORT JAW AND JCO OFFICE BUILDING, S I N G H A D U R B A R ,

ANNEX 1: Seismic Gap Assessment For Left and Right Wing STOR Y   5 4 3 2 1

Max Def (mm) Sesimi in X direction c Gap I = 1.25 LEFT RIGH WIN T G WING Reqd   42.54 294.94 235.955 31.192 4 4 2 33.54 243.26 194.614 27.276 1 8 4 25.69 189.34 151.475 21.643 3 4 2 16.66 124.92 14.568 4 8 99.9424 7.407 6.776 56.732 45.3856 PROVIDE 300mm expansion joint

64 | P a g e