Technical Report For A Structural Design Project

AN-NAJAH NATIONAL UNIVERSITY
Technical Report 2
Three-Dimensional Analysis and Design of the Gateway Building
Bashar Deek
Yazan Muqbel
Mo’az Alawneh
Muhammed Fashafsheh
Supervisor: Dr. Samir H. Helou

December, 2013
to our parents
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
We would like to express sincere heartfelt gratitude to our advisor Dr. Samir H. Helou
for his valuable guidance and advice. He never ceased helping us learn important topics
in the field of Structural Engineering. Dr. Helou has been a great source of
encouragement and motivation as he provided us with his undivided attention and
continuous support.
ABSTRACT
The following project aims at providing a state of the art reinforced concrete structural
design undertaking of a commercial building situated in the city of Ramallah; it is called
The Gateway Building.
The building is comprised of thirteen stories, of which the three basement levels serve as
parking spaces, one basement level is reserved for storage purposes and the rest seven
stories provide office spaces and stores. The upper most two floors are reserved for
restaurants. The three basement levels together have a total area of 4800 square meters;
each of the upper floors has an average floor area of about 870 square meters.
The loads on each floor will be calculated according to its function. Load values,
combinations and factors will be in compliance with the ACI, the IBC or the UBC.
Analysis and design of the structure will be carried out using the Extended Three
Dimensional Analysis of Building Systems Software, ETABS. The slabs’ design as well as
the foundation design will be carried out using SAFE computer software. Various
roofing schemes are investigated and explored; the most economic one is recommended.
Foundation design is an inseparable part of the present design undertaking.
The Gateway Building has already been designed and constructed in Ramallah. However,
the present design exercise is conducted with absolutely no reference to any other
previous propriety design efforts.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
CHAPTER I: INTRODUCTION & NUMERICAL MODELING ........................................9
1. PURPOSE: ....................................................................................................................................................9
2. BUILDING INTRODUCTION: ..............................................................................................................................9
3. STRUCTURAL TOPOLOGY ...............................................................................................................................12
3.1 Design Codes .....................................................................................................................................12
3.2 Materials Used ..................................................................................................................................12
3.3 Gravity Loads: ....................................................................................................................................13
3.3.1. Dead Loads .............................................................................................................................................. 13
3.3.2. Snow Loads.............................................................................................................................................. 13
3.4 Load Combinations: ...........................................................................................................................15
3.5 Soil Conditions: ..................................................................................................................................15
4. THE MODEL: ..............................................................................................................................................16
4.1 Model Geometry:...............................................................................................................................16
4.2 The Finite Element Model: .................................................................................................................22
4.2.1. The Frame Element: ................................................................................................................................ 22
4.2.2. Soil Springs .............................................................................................................................................. 24
4.2.3. The Shell Element: ................................................................................................................................... 25
4.2.3.1 The Mat Foundation: .................................................................................................................... 27
4.2.3.2 The Walls: ..................................................................................................................................... 28
4.2.3.3 Ramps: .......................................................................................................................................... 29
4.2.3.4 Stair Cases: .................................................................................................................................... 30
4.2.3.5 Slabs: ............................................................................................................................................. 31
4.2.4. Model Creation Procedure ...................................................................................................................... 32
4.2.5. Model Load Assignment .......................................................................................................................... 33
CHAPTER II: LINEAR STATIC ANALYSIS & DESIGN ................................................... 34
1. PRELIMINARY ANALYSIS RESULTS....................................................................................................................34

1.1 Punching shear ..................................................................................................................................34
1.2 Deflection: .........................................................................................................................................38
2. STRUCTURAL DESIGN FOR STATIC LOADS..........................................................................................................39
2.1 Concrete Frame Design ......................................................................................................................39
2.1.1. Column Design: ....................................................................................................................................... 39
2.2 Wall Design:.......................................................................................................................................51
2.3 Slab Design: .......................................................................................................................................63
th
2.3.1. 4 Basement Slab Design ........................................................................................................................ 64
2.3.2. First-Roof Slab Design.............................................................................................................................. 68
2.4 Mat Foundation Design: ....................................................................................................................70
CHAPTER III: EARTHQUAKE ANALYSIS & DESIGN .................................................... 75
1. BACKGROUND ............................................................................................................................................75
2. GEOLOGY ..................................................................................................................................................75
3. MODAL ANALYSIS .......................................................................................................................................76
4. EQUIVALENT LATERAL LOAD METHOD .............................................................................................................77
5. RESPONSE SPECTRUM ANALYSIS.....................................................................................................................80
6. LOAD COMBINATIONS ..................................................................................................................................81
7. RESULTS ....................................................................................................................................................81
8. STRUCTURAL DESIGN FOR DYNAMIC LOADS......................................................................................................82
8.1 Mat Foundation Design .....................................................................................................................82
8.2 Slabs Design .......................................................................................................................................84
8.2.1. Fourth Basement Slab Design.................................................................................................................. 84
CHAPTER IV: STRUCTURAL DESIGN SUMMARY & CONCLUSION.......................... 86
1. STRUCTURAL DESIGN SUMMARY ....................................................................................................................86

2. CONCLUSION ..............................................................................................................................................86
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1: Codes Used for Analysis and Design ......................................................................................12

Table 2: Materials Used-Concrete...........................................................................................................12
Table 3: Materials Used- Grade 60 Rebar Steel ....................................................................................12
Table 4: Lateral Earth Pressure ...............................................................................................................13
Table 5: ASCE Minimum Design Loads ...............................................................................................14
Table 6: Load Combinations ...................................................................................................................15
Table 7: Cartesian Grid Data ...................................................................................................................17
Table 8: Cylindrical Grid Data ................................................................................................................18
Table 9: Cylindrical System Origin .........................................................................................................18
Table 10: Frame element sections used in the model ..........................................................................23
Table 11: Story Data .................................................................................................................................31
Table 12: Punching shear ratios for all 50 columns in the 4th basement...........................................35
Table 13: Punching shear ratios for all 25 columns in the 1st roof ...................................................37
Table 15: Maximum Deflection Values at Selected Floors .................................................................38
Table 14: ACI TABLE 9.5 (b) of maximum permissible roof deflections .......................................38
Table 16: "Interior Columns_Large" Auto-Select List ........................................................................39
Table 17: "Interior Columns_Small" Auto-Select List ........................................................................40
Table 18: "Exterior Columns' Auto-Select List ....................................................................................40
Table 19: Columns Section Design ........................................................................................................46
Table 20: Column forces in the 4th basement .......................................................................................46
Table 21: ETABS flexural design data of C23 column section ..........................................................47
Table 22: ETABS shear design data of C23 column section ..............................................................48
Table 23: ETABS report for uniform basement wall reinforcement ................................................54
Table 24: ETABS report for uniform interior wall reinforcement ....................................................58
Table 25: CSA3 forces and reinforcement reported by SAFE in B4 slab ........................................65
Table 26: Forces and Reinforcement as reported by SAFE for max. design strip in 1st Roof .....69
Table 27: Soil Pressure .............................................................................................................................71
Table 28: SAFE vs. hand-calculated values for mat reinforcement ..................................................73
Table 29: Modal analysis output .............................................................................................................77
Table 30: Modal mass participating ratios .............................................................................................77
Table 31: Parameters of Equivalent Lateral Load Method .................................................................78
Table 32: Table 16-N from UBC-97 Code............................................................................................78
Table 33l: Load combinations for earthquake loads ............................................................................81
Table 34: Soil pressure summary due to combined lateral and gravity loads ...................................82
Table 35: Soil pressure summary for a 60cm-thick foundation .........................................................82
Table 36: Max. forces in the mat foundation due to dynamic load ...................................................83
Table 37: Punching shear data for 4th basement slab .........................................................................84
Table 38: Punching shear data for 4th basement slab with drop panels ...........................................85
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1: The Gateway Building ............................................................................................................... 9

Figure 2: Above-grade floors plan ..........................................................................................................10
Figure 3: Basement floor plan .................................................................................................................10
Figure 4: Elevation view of the building................................................................................................11
Figure 5: Model units and design codes.................................................................................................16
Figure 6: Grid Systems .............................................................................................................................16
Figure 7: Cartesian and Cylindrical Grid Systems ................................................................................19
Figure 8: Floors Labels .............................................................................................................................20
Figure 9: Story Data ..................................................................................................................................21
Figure 10: Local coordinate system of the frame element ..................................................................22
Figure 11: Local coordinates of a column section ...............................................................................23
Figure 12: Area spring property data......................................................................................................24
Figure 13: Soil Modulus assignment to shells .......................................................................................24
Figure 14: Quadrilateral shell element ....................................................................................................25
Figure 15: Shell element uniform coordinate systems .........................................................................26
Figure 16: 3D view of the mat foundation ............................................................................................27
Figure 17: Mat foundation section properties.......................................................................................27
Figure 18: 3D screen capture of the walls .............................................................................................28
Figure 19: 3D capture of the ramps .......................................................................................................29
Figure 20: Ramp-wall connection ...........................................................................................................29
Figure 21: 3D screen capture of stair slabs ...........................................................................................30
Figure 22: Slab mesh .................................................................................................................................31
Figure 23: 3D Extruded view of slabs ...................................................................................................31
Figure 24: The "model check" option ....................................................................................................32
Figure 25: Base Reactions due to a test load .........................................................................................33
Figure 26: Uniform shell load assignment .............................................................................................33
Figure 27: Snapshot of SAFE punching shear parameters for a 700X700mm interior column ...36
Figure 28: Local axes of columns ...........................................................................................................40
Figure 29: Column Labels ........................................................................................................................41
Figure 30: Column rebar selection rules in ETABS .............................................................................49
Figure 31: C23 rebar details in 3D view.................................................................................................49
Figure 32: Design section "E" for C23 column....................................................................................50
Figure 33: Design section "C" for C23 column ....................................................................................50
Figure 34: C23 design schedule from base to staircase .......................................................................50
Figure 35: Plan view of external basement walls ..................................................................................51
Figure 36: Extruded 3D view of external basement wall ....................................................................52
Figure 37: V23 values for the external basement wall .........................................................................53
Figure 38: M22 values for interior wall section ....................................................................................55
Figure 39:V23 values for interior wall section ......................................................................................56
Figure 40: Rebar selection prefrences for walls ....................................................................................59
Figure 41: 3D view of confined wall reinforcement at corners .........................................................60
Figure 42: Reinforced section in internal shear wall ............................................................................61
Figure 43: Elevation section of internal wall reinforcement ...............................................................62
Figure 44: Screen capture of design strips menu in SAFE v12 ..........................................................63
Figure 45: X-axis design strips for 4th basement slabs .........................................................................64
Figure 46: CSA_3 moment diagram .......................................................................................................64
Figure 47: Moment Diagrams for all A-strips in 4th basement slab .................................................66
Figure 48: Moment Diagrams for all B-strips in 4th basement slab ..................................................67
Figure 49: Design-strip moment diagram with max. values ...............................................................68
Figure 50: Moment diagrams in both A&B strips for 1st-roof slab ..................................................68
Figure 51: Moment diagram of A-strips in mat foundation ...............................................................72
Figure 52: Moment diagrams of B strips in mat foundation ..............................................................73
Figure 53: Mat foundation detailing preferences ..................................................................................74
Figure 54: Seismic zone factor map .......................................................................................................75
Figure 55: Mass source Definition..........................................................................................................76
Figure 56: Story shears in X-direction due to ELLMX .......................................................................79
Figure 57: Story shears in Y-direction due to ELLMY .......................................................................79
Figure 58: Response spectrum curve .....................................................................................................80
Figure 59: CSA3 moment diagram for Comb8 ....................................................................................84
CHAPTER I: Introduction & Numerical Modeling
1. Purpose:
The purpose of this Graduation Project Exercise is to analyze and design the structural system
for a multi-functional building in Ramallah; dubbed the Gateway Building. The 3-D analysis and
design undertakings are carried out in compliance with the ASCE, ACI and UBC codes of
practice. This is accomplished by the widely used computer software ETABS and SAFE.
2. Building Introduction:
The Gateway Building is a multi-functional building located in the city of Ramallah, Al-Irsal
Street. It is comprised of thirteen stories of which four basement levels serve as parking spaces
and the rest eight floors provide office spaces, stores and restaurants. The total area of the
building is about 14,000 square meters. All stories have a height of 3 meters each.
According to floor area and geometry, there are two groups of identical floors; the four
basement floors and the upper floors.
Figure 1: The Gateway Building
9
Figure 3: Basement floor plan
Figure 2: Above-grade floors plan
10
Figure 4: Elevation view of the building
11
3. Structural Topology
3.1 Design Codes
Code Use
ASCE /SEI 7-10 Minimum design loads, minimum section
requirements and load combinations.
ACI Code 318-11 Frames and shear wall section design and rebar.
ACI Code 318-08 Slab and mat foundation design using SAFE v12
UBC 97 Earthquake analysis

Table 1: Codes Used for Analysis and Design
3.2 Materials Used

Concrete
Strength f’c Unit Weight Modulus of Elasticity
Usage
(MPa) (kN/m3) (MPa)
Foundation 35 23.54 27806
Columns 35 23.54 27806
Shear Walls 28 23.54 24870
Slabs 28 23.54 24870
Table 2: Materials Used-Concrete
Rebar Steel
Min. Modulus of Elasticity
Min. Yield
Tensile Unit Weight (MPa)
Usage Strength
Strength (kN/m3)
(MPa)
(MPa)
Foundation 413 621 77 200E+3
Columns 413 621 77 200E+3
Shear Walls 413 621 77 200E+3
Slabs 413 621 77 200E+3
Table 3: Materials Used- Grade 60 Rebar Steel
Solving for displacements and forces will be in the linear and elastic part of the stress-strain
diagram for each material. All materials are isotropic.
12
3.3 Gravity Loads:
3.3.1. Dead Loads
The Dead loads are due to structural elements self weight. This load is computed
internally by the software and included in the analysis. The self-weight multiplier is
1, so ETABS calculates the weight of an element by multiplying the materials
density by the volume of element.
Lateral earth pressure; this type of load acts on structural elements below the
ground level; these are the external walls of the 4 basements. Backfill soil is
classified as silty gravels or poorly graded gravel-sand mixes with a design lateral
load value of 5.50 kN/m2 per one meter of depth. Table (3.2-1, ASCE).
Since ETABS software does not have a linear function for loads varying with
depth, it is decided that maximum earth pressure is calculated at the bottom of
each basement story and imported to ETABS as uniformly distributed loads over
areas.
Depth below Lateral earth

Basement grade pressure
Floor (m) (kN/m2)
4th basement 12 66
3rd basement 9 49.5
2nd basement 6 33
1st basement 3 16.5
Table 4: Lateral Earth Pressure
3.3.2. Snow Loads

Considering a snow density of 300 kg/m3 and a Maximum snow height of 70 cm;
the snow load per square meter is 210 kg/m2 which corresponds to 2 kN/m2.
13
Live Superimposed Snow
Dead Load
Floor Function Load Dead Load
(kN/m2)
(kN/m2) Load (kN/m2) (kN/m2
4th basement Parking 2.5 Self weight 0 0
3rd basement Parking 2.5 Self weight 0 0
2nd basement Parking 2.5 Self weight 0 0
1st basement Parking 2.5 Self weight 0 0
Ground Floor Store spaces 3.6 Self weight 2 0
Mezzanine Floor Store spaces 3.6 Self weight 2 0
1st floor Office spaces 2.4 Self weight 2 0
2nd floor Office spaces 2.4 Self weight 2 0
3rd floor Office spaces 2.4 Self weight 2 0
4th floor Office spaces 2.4 Self weight 2 0
5th floor Office spaces 2.4 Self weight 2 0
1 roof floor
st Restaurants 4.8 Self weight 2 0
2nd roof floor Restaurants 4.8 Self weight 0 2
Staircase floor Staircase 1 Self weight 0 2
Table 5: ASCE Minimum Design Loads
14
3.4 Load Combinations:
For the analysis and design of the Gateway Building, gravity static loads are
considered; the ASCE 7-5 in Chapter 2 recommends the use of the following load
combinations for the strength design method:
Comb1: U= 1.4D
Comb2: U=1.2D + 1.6L
Comb3: U=1.2D + 1.6L + 0.5S
Comb4: U=1.2D+1.6L+ 0.5S+1.6H
Comb5: U=Envelope (Comb1, Comb2, Comb3, Comb4)
Table 6: Load Combinations
3.5 Soil Conditions:

The Structure is built on rock that has a bearing capacity of 250 kN/m2. During
analysis and design the soil is treated as a linear and elastic material which means the
modulus of sub-grade soil is constant.
15
4. The Model:
Numerical Modeling is the basis for modern structural analysis and design. The model
has to simulate the expected behavior of all elements within the structure.
4.1 Model Geometry:

Model geometry is created in partial conformity with the architectural plans of the
building. A more challenging structural system necessitated the elimination of some
columns that are deemed superfluous; this resulted in longer span lengths at some
locations.
Model geometry creation steps:
Metric SI standard units are used. All geometric dimensions are in meter units.
Design code preferences are also selected
Figure 5: Model units and design codes
The geometry of the building required defining both Cartesian and cylindrical
gridlines. Cartesian grid system is named G1 and cylindrical system is called
Cylindrical inside ETABS. Secondary gridlines were separately added in order to
account for interior structural details like shear walls and ramps. Gridlines are very
important since they provide the milestones for model creation and facilitate the
process of connecting finite elements precisely in the model.
Figure 6: Grid Systems 16

G1- Cartesian Grid Data
X Grid data Y Grid Data
Grid ID X Ordinate (cm) Grid ID Y Ordinate (cm)
A 0 1 574.2
B 1442.6 2 1204.2
C 1912.6 3 2584.2
D 2758.8 4 3326
E 3301.2 5 3461.4
F 3886.7 - -
G 4526.2 - -
H 5100.4 - -
I 5411.4 - -
Secondary Grid Lines
Grid ID X1 (cm) Y1 (cm) X2 (cm) Y2 (cm)
A1
0 0 933.2 3461.4
A2
933.2 3461.4 5411.4 3326
5411.4 3326 5100.4 574.2

A3
A4
686.7 0 1614.7 3442.1
2908.8 2584.2 2908.8 2974.2

A5
A6
2908.8 2974.2 3886.7 2974.2
0 0 4526.2 0
6
Table 7: Cartesian Grid Data
17
Cylindrical Grid Data
Radial Grid Data
Grid ID R Ordinate (cm)
A’
0
B’ 574.2
Tangential Grid data
Grid ID T Ordinate (cm)
10 0
9 10
8 20
7 30
6 40
5 50
4 60
3 70
2 80
1 90
Table 8: Cylindrical Grid Data
Cylindrical System Origin
Global X (cm) 4526.2
Global Y (cm) 574.2
Rotation (deg) -90
Table 9: Cylindrical System Origin
Note that cylindrical system’s origin is located at the intersection of Cartesian gridlines 1&G.
18
Figure 7: Cartesian and Cylindrical Grid Systems
19
Stories are defined in ETABS from bottom to top, keeping in mind that ETABS
labels floors according to their ceiling, i.e. B4 slab is the top of the 4th basement
floor and the ground slab for the 3rd basement floor and so on. Height of each story
is assigned as well.
Figure 8: Floors Labels
20
Height Elevation
Floor Name
(mm) (mm)
Stair Case 3000 42000

Roof2 3000 39000
Roof1 3000 36000
F5 3000 33000
F4 3000 30000
F3 3000 27000
F2 3000 24000
F1 3000 21000
MEZZANINE 3000 18000
GF 3000 15000
B1 3000 12000
B2 3000 9000
B3 3000 6000
B4 3000 3000
Base 0 0
Figure 9: Story Data
21
4.2 The Finite Element Model:
All structural elements in the model are either frame or shells elements. The task is to
select the element type that would simulate the real behavior of the structure. The three-
dimensional model consists of a large number of finite-elements connected together at
the nodes.
The following are the element types used in the numerical model:
4.2.1. The Frame Element:
The frame element is modeled as a straight line connecting two points. This
element activates six degrees of freedom at both of its joints (three translational
and three rotational) and include the effects of biaxial bending, torsion, axial
deformation and biaxial shear deformations.
A frame element has its own local coordinate system. The axes of this local
system are denoted by 1, 2 and 3. The “1” axis is directed along the length of the
element, the “2 & 3” axes lie in the plane perpendicular to the element.
Understanding the local coordinate system is essential since it is the basis of load
assignment and reading analysis results.
Figure 10: Local coordinate system of the frame element
22
ETABS reports internal forces in frame elements as follows:
P, the axial force.

V2, the shear force in the 1-2 plane.
V3, the shear force in the 1-3 plane.
T, the axial torque.
M2, the bending moment in the 1-3 plane (about the 2-axis).
M3, the bending moment in the 1-2 plane (about the 3 axis)
All frame elements used in the model are prismatic and have square sections. All column
supports at the bottom of the lower basement level are pinned.
Frame element sections used in the model

Section Depth (mm) Width (mm) Material
C70x70 700 700 Concrete_35MPa
C40X40 400 400 Concrete_35MPa
Table 10: Frame element sections used in the model
The figure below shows local axes of a typical column in ETABS, where the width is
along the 3-axis and the depth is along the 2-axis.
Figure 11: Local coordinates of a column section
23
4.2.2. Soil Springs
The soil supporting the structure is assumed to be linear and elastic with constant sub-
grade modulus of (40 * safety factor * soil allowable pressure). Soil springs are assigned
as area springs with stiffness equal to sub-grade modulus in the Z-direction and zero
stiffness in the other two directions.
Figure 12: Area spring property data
Soil property (Modulus of Sub-grade Reaction is 25,000 kN/m3) is assigned to all shell
elements that compose the mat foundation.
Figure 13: Soil Modulus assignment to shells

24
4.2.3. The Shell Element:
The shell element is a three- or four-node element that combines both

membrane and plate-bending behavior. The major advantage of using the shell
element in this model is that it does not have to be planar, thus it can be used to
model inclined ramps and stairs. Shell elements in the model are uniformly-
loaded in gravity and normal-to-plane directions.
Both quadrilateral and triangular elements are used in the model, but the majority
of shell elements are of a quadrilateral shape. Triangular elements are used in
corners and irregular locations where the quadrilateral element could not be used.
The shell element has its own local coordinate system. The axes of this local
system are denoted 1, 2 and 3. The “1 & 2” axes lie in the plane of the element
and the “3-axis” is normal to the plane. The shell element always activates all six
degrees of freedom at each of its connected joints (Ux, Uy, Uz, Rx, Ry and Rz).
Figure 14: Quadrilateral shell element
25
All shell elements used in the model are “thin-shells” which means that shear
deformations are neglected. Local axes of area elements are meant to be uniform (all
pointing towards one direction); this facilitates retrieving analysis results and assigning
loads.
Figure 15: Shell element uniform coordinate systems
ETABS reports internal forces in shell element as the following:
F11: Direct force per unit length acting at the mid-surface of the element on the
positive and negative 1 faces in the 1-axis direction.
F22: Direct force per unit length acting at the mid-surface of the element on the
positive and negative 2 faces in the 2-axis direction.
F12: Shearing force per unit length acting at the mid-surface of the element on the
positive and negative 1 faces in the 2-axis direction, and acting on the positive and
negative 2 faces in the 1-axis direction.
V13: Out-of-plane shear per unit length acting at the mid-surface of the element on
the positive and negative 1 faces in the 3-axis direction.
V23: Out-of-plane shear per unit length acting at the mid-surface of the element on
the positive and negative 2 faces in the 3-axis direction.
M11: Direct moment per unit length acting at the mid-surface of the element on the
positive and negative 1 faces about the 2-axis.
M22: Direct moment per unit length acting at the mid-surface of the element on the
positive and negative 2 faces about the 1-axis.
M12: Twisting moment per unit length acting at the mid-surface of the element on
the positive and negative 1 faces about the 1-axis, and acting on the positive and
negative 2 faces about the 2-axis.
26
Shell elements are used in the model for the following structural systems:
4.2.3.1 The Mat Foundation:

A mat foundation of 25 cm thickness is spread under the entire building; underneath
columns there is additional thickness (drop panels) extruding 35 cm below the mat
foundation. Concrete of 35 MPa compressive strength is used for the foundations.
Figure 16: 3D view of the mat foundation
Figure 17: Mat foundation section properties
27
4.2.3.2 The Walls:
Walls of 30 cm thickness are constructed in the outer perimeter of the building where they
act as retaining walls. Interior walls are of 20cm thickness acting as shear walls and elevator
cores. All walls are defined as shell elements. All wall supports at the bottom of the lower
basement level were idealized as pinned connections. Windows and doors are assigned as
wall openings.
Figure 18: 3D screen capture of the walls
28
4.2.3.3Ramps:
Ramps are used in basement parking levels, so the model includes four ramps. They are
modeled as shell elements with a thickness of 25cm. Ramps’ meshing is made with added
accuracy so that the nodes on the ramp are adequately connected with the shear walls
surrounding it. The modeling choice is made since there will be ample steel anchorage
between the ramps and the walls; concrete is cast simultaneously for ramps and the adjacent
parts of the walls.
Figure 19: 3D capture of the ramps
Figure 20: Ramp-wall connection
29
4.2.3.4 Stair Cases:
The stair slabs are modeled as shell elements having a thickness of 20 cm. The stairs’ slabs
are connected with the floor slabs in the model with no connection to the shear walls.
Figure 21: 3D screen capture of stair slabs
30
4.2.3.5 Slabs:
Slabs of 25 cm thickness are defined as shell elements; they are used in the model for all
floor levels.
Figure 22: Slab mesh
Table 11: Story Data
Figure 23: 3D Extruded view of slabs 31

4.2.4. Model Creation Procedure
The finite elements comprising the structure are interconnected with high accuracy and
precision starting from base to top floor level.
The 13-floors could be all replicated at once, but this is not a convenient act since errors
in the model are almost inevitable, therefore once a certain storey is ready it is preferred
to carry out a “Model Check” which will check area overlaps and other types of errors in
the model. When a “Model Check” indicates errors, it is the designer’s job to locate the
errors and fix them before trying to perform a “Model Run”, taking into consideration
that a “no-error-message” that the check process shows does not necessarily indicate
that the model will be “error-free” after performing the “Model Run”. In conclusion,
carrying out a “Model Run” upon the completion of each individual story is the proper
way to smoothen the process of locating errors. The “Model Run” is performed using
the standard solver at the level of modeling since it reports errors in the model and locates
them.
Figure 24: The "model check" option
32
Most types of errors that are encountered are the “lost digits of accuracy”, mostly of 6 or
7 digits. The other type of error is the “Instability Error” which indicates the whole
structure or some elements are instable; this is normally due to lack of boundary
conditions.
After making sure that model is free of any type of error, an equilibrium check is carried
out. A test point load of 100 kN is applied at some point in the model in the three
directions (X, Y and Z) and base reactions are subsequently checked. Results confirm the
state of static equilibrium since base reactions in all directions must equal the applied
point loads.
Figure 25: Base Reactions due to a test load
4.2.5. Model Load Assignment

After making sure that the model is free of any type of errors, the loads are assigned
according to the minimum design loads reported in Tables 4 & 5. All loads in the model
are uniform loads distributed on area elements.
For the assignment of load cases (superimposed, live and snow loads) on the slabs, all
the slabs having the same load values are selected and have the load assigned to them in
the gravity direction.
Figure 26: Uniform shell load assignment
33
CHAPTER II: LINEAR STATIC ANALYSIS & DESIGN
1. Preliminary Analysis Results
1.1 Punching shear

A thickness of 25cm for the slabs is deemed adequate for resisting punching shear, yet the
method used for the check is simple and does not account for moment effects on the
punching shear stress and assumes a one-way behavior of slabs; a method that is not very
accurate for buildings.
SAFE V12 software is used for calculating punching shear ratios. Floors from ETABS
model are exported to SAFE V12 while considering load on the exported floor plus all loads
that come from upper stories. Punching shear ratio is the quotient of the maximum design
shear stress over the concrete shear stress capacity. Ratios with a value of less than one mean
that slab thickness is adequate for resisting punching shear; otherwise, slab thickness must be
increased.
The punching shear ratio check is performed for the mat foundation, 4th basement and 1st
roof. This selection of floors is based on change in live load values and load from upper
stories. 4th basement has the largest vertical load on columns; mat foundation has the largest
vertical load combined with soil stress while the 1st roof has the highest live load value of all
floors.
The following table is the SAFE output for punching shear ratios based on ACI-318-08 code
considering zero reinforcement for the 4th basement. COMB4 is used for the calculation.
Maximum shear ratio (highlighted in red) is less than one. The “Not Calculated” message is
generated because SAFE does not compute shear stress for columns that intersect with
beams and/or shear walls. A 250 mm-thickness slab is deemed adequate for resisting
punching shear for basement floors.
Global X Global Y Ratio Vu

Point Status
(m) (m) (Unitless) (kN)
2087 14.426 12.042 Not Calculated
2088 19.126 25.842 OK 0.75442 589.752
2089 19.126 18.892 OK 0.524153 473.234
2090 19.126 12.042 OK 0.461789 399.601
2091 19.126 5.742 OK 0.733241 651.462
2092 27.588 25.842 OK 0.836288 732.716
2093 27.588 18.892 OK 0.834174 766.548
2094 27.588 12.042 OK 0.888361 762.012
2095 27.588 5.742 OK 0.793316 753.616
2096 38.867 12.042 OK 0.991457 666.383
2097 38.867 5.742 OK 0.891976 674.168
2098 38.867 18.892 OK 0.922998 650.342
2099 45.262 25.842 OK 0.881885 743.552
2100 45.262 18.892 OK 0.610887 559.122
34
2101 45.262 12.042 OK 0.513137 480.402
2102 45.262 5.742 OK 0.466837 444.783
2103 8.41506 5.742 OK 0.764348 702.741
2104 6.867 0 Not Calculated
2111 51.004 5.742 Not Calculated
2112 51.71601 12.042 Not Calculated
2113 52.49017 18.892 Not Calculated
2114 53.27564 25.842 Not Calculated
2116 45.262 33.52765 Not Calculated
2117 38.867 33.721 Not Calculated
2118 33.012 33.89803 Not Calculated
2119 27.588 34.06202 Not Calculated
2120 19.126 34.31787 Not Calculated
2121 14.426 34.45998 Not Calculated
2123 3.24655 12.042 Not Calculated
2124 1.54805 5.742 Not Calculated
2125 0 0 Not Calculated
2126 6.96705 25.842 Not Calculated
2127 5.09332 18.892 Not Calculated
2128 10.11355 12.042 Not Calculated
2332 14.426 18.892 Not Calculated
2345 14.426 25.842 Not Calculated
10410 33.012 25.842 Not Calculated
10428 38.867 25.842 Not Calculated
10431 38.867 29.742 Not Calculated
10449 33.012 29.742 Not Calculated
10476 29.088 29.742 Not Calculated
10479 29.088 25.842 Not Calculated
2087 14.426 12.042 Not Calculated
Table 12: Punching shear ratios for all 50 columns in the 4th basement
SAFE V2 uses the following equation for calculating punching shear stress (CSI Technical
Report 1 “How SAFE Calculates Punching Shear Ratios, November 16th, 1998”). The following
snapshot illustrates how SAFE applies the punching shear equation.
VU =
35
Figure 27: Snapshot of SAFE punching shear parameters for a 700X700mm interior column
36
The same procedure is performed for the 1st roof floor where the live load is 4.8 kN/m2
(The largest of all floors).
GlobalX GlobalY Ratio Vu

Point Status
(m) (m) (Unitless) (kN)
2187 14.426 12.042 Not Calculated
2189 19.126 25.842 OK 0.933907 705.807
2191 19.126 18.892 OK 0.990372 825.109
2193 19.126 12.042 OK 0.953191 783.597
2197 27.588 25.842 OK 0.954601 715.622
2198 27.588 18.892 Failed 1.401612 1246.713
2199 27.588 12.042 Failed 1.495514 1280.51
2203 38.867 12.042 OK 0.964988 1177.222
2207 38.867 18.892 Failed 1.441559 1158.114
2208 45.262 25.842 Not Calculated
2210 45.262 18.892 Not Calculated
2212 45.262 12.042 Not Calculated
2216 8.41506 5.742 Not Calculated
2226 10.11355 12.042 Not Calculated
2249 38.867 25.842 Not Calculated
2250 38.867 29.742 Not Calculated
2251 29.088 29.742 Not Calculated
2252 29.088 25.842 Not Calculated
2322 14.426 18.892 Not Calculated
2335 14.426 25.842 Not Calculated
14793 33.012 25.842 Not Calculated
14830 33.012 29.742 Not Calculated
Table 13: Punching shear ratios for all 25 columns in the 1st roof
Results show that a 250-mm-thick slab is inadequate for resisting punching shear at the
interior columns therefore 150-mm-thick drop panels are used at interior columns. After
applying the same procedure; Ground and Mezzanine floors need 150-mm-thick drop panels
for the interior columns. Accordingly, a drop panel of 40 cm thickness is defined and
assigned into the model at all interior columns.
37
1.2 Deflection:
Deflection of structural elements in the building is a major concern. Actual deflections in the
building need to be checked against permissible deflection limits in the ACI 318-08 code in
order to judge slab thickness adequacy.
Table 14: ACI TABLE 9.5 (b) of maximum permissible roof deflections
The critical criterion for checking deflection is L/480 since the building has nonstructural
elements likely to be damaged by large deflections. Floors are exported separately to SAFE
V12 for deflection check.
Location Allowable
Max. deflection, Critical Span
Floor Case Deflection Status
Uz (mm) length (mm)
X Y (mm)
Roof 1 Comb4 22.99 33.012 15.042 11300 23.5 OK
GF Comb4 21.59 33.012 15.042 11300 23.5 OK
B4 Comb4 22.54 33.012 15.042 11300 23.5 OK
F1 Comb4 18.57 33.012 15.042 11330 23.5 OK
Table 15: Maximum Deflection Values at Selected Floors
Maximum deflection values do not exceed maximum permissible values, therefore the slab
thickness is judged adequate.
38
2. Structural Design for Static Loads
After analysis of the ETABS model has been completed and the preliminary results are quite
satisfying, the design process will be carried out in order to select optimum section
dimensions and reinforcement ratios for all structural elements in the building.
2.1 Concrete Frame Design

This includes the design of both columns and beams in the building. Design is performed in
compliance with the ACI-318-11 Code.
2.1.1. Column Design:
Column sections used in the modeling stage are checked again in the design stage in
order to assure their adequacy of resisting applied forces and to select the optimum
section dimensions. ETABS is used for this type of design where all columns in the
model are assigned to an “auto-select list” where the software is given multiple
sections defined by the user; the software’s job is to select the optimum section. A
first check trial was carried out; it indicated that 70X70cm column section is not
adequate at some locations.
Three auto-select lists are created; one for the interior columns that have relatively
large axial loads, one for the interior columns that have relatively small axial loads
and one for the exterior columns.
Large Interior Columns
Radius of Gyration
Section Label Width mm Depth mm
about weak axis(mm)
C80X80 800 800 230.9
C80X60 800 600 173.2
C60X60 600 600 173.2
C40X40 400 400 115.5
Table 16: "Interior Columns_Large" Auto-Select List
39
Small Interior Columns
Radius of Gyration
Section Label Width Depth
about weak axis(mm)
C60X60 600 600 173.2
C60X40 600 400 115.5
C40X40 400 400 115.5
Table 17: "Interior Columns_Small" Auto-Select List
Large Exterior Columns
Radius of Gyration
Section Label Width Depth
about weak axis(mm)
C40X40 600 600 115.5
C30X30 600 400 86.6
Table 18: "Exterior Columns' Auto-Select List
Figure 27 below shows local axes of columns in ETABS, where width is along 3-axis and
depth is along 2-axis.
Figure 28: Local axes of columns
The drawing next page shows all columns in the 4th basement level with all column labels.
ETABS provided optimum sections for each column label according to the “auto-select” list
each column is assigned to. Large interior columns and small interior columns are divided
into 5 groups based on story levels; there are five groups (basements, GF to F2, F3 to F5,
2Roofs and the staircase). Exterior columns are not assigned to any group, thus sections for
these columns are going to be the same along all story levels.
40
Figure 29: Column Labels
41
Column
Auto-select list Group Design Section
Label
Basements C80X80
GF to F2 C80X80
Interior
C22 F3 to F5 C80X80
Columns_Large
2 Floors C80X80
Staircase C60X60
Basements C80X80
GF to F2 C80X80
Interior
C23 F3 to F5 C80X80
Columns_Large
2 Floors C80X80
Staircase C60X60
Basements C80X80
GF to F2 C80X80
Interior
C24
Columns_Large
F3 to F5 C80X80
2 Floors C80X80
Basements C80X80
GF to F2 C80X80
Interior
C25
Columns_Large
F3 to F5 C80X80
2 Floors C80X80
Basements C80X80
GF to F2 C80X80
Interior
C42 F3 to F5 C80X80
Columns_Large
2 Floors C80X80
Staircase C60X60
42
Column
Label
Basements C80X80
GF to F2 C80X80
Interior
C20 F3 to F5 C80X80
Columns_Large
2 Floors C80X80
Staircase C60X60
Basements C80X80
GF to F2 C80X80
Interior
C12
Columns_Large
F3 to F5 C80X80
2 Floors C80X80
Basements C80X80
GF to F2 C80X80
Interior
C16
Columns_Large
F3 to F5 C80X80
2 Floors C80X80
Basements C60X60
Interior_Columns GF to F2 C60X60
C3
Small F3 to F5 C60XC40
2 Floors C60X60
Basements C60X60
C11
2 Floors C60X60
Basements C60X60
Interior_Columns
C18 GF to F2 C60X60
Small
F3 to F5 C60XC40
43
Interior_Columns
C18 2 Floors C60X60
Small
Basements C60X60
C19
2 Floors C60X60
Basements C60X60
C7
Small F3 to F5 C60X40
2 Floors C60X40
Basements C60X60
C8
2 Roofs C60XC40
Basements C60X60
C9
2 Roofs C60XC40
Basements C60XC40
Interior_Columns GF to F2 C60XC40
C10
2 Roofs C60XC40
Basements C60XC40
Interior_Columns GF to F2 C60XC40
C13
2 Roofs C60XC40
44
Column
Label
C34 External Columns All C30X30
45
Table 19: Columns Section Design
Selection of “Auto-select” lists and column groups take two points into consideration:
optimization (selecting the minimum section that resists applied loads) and convenience
during construction by keeping the number of column sections as minimum and as uniform
as possible.
The table below shows an example of forces in design sections in the 4th basement level.
Column Comb Station P V2 V3 T M2 M3

Label m kN kN kN kN.m kN.m kN.m
C22 Comb5 0 -4405 -402 -142 1.69 -408 -1094

3 -4342 -402 -142 1.69 31 112
C23 Comb5 0 -9175 -228 98 1.33 202 -548
3 -9112 -228 98 1.33 -54 189
C13 Comb5 0 -2690 -20 -13. -0.4 -9.15 -28
3 -2666 -20 -13 -0.4 46.77 40
C48 Comb5 0 -395 2 -11 0.76 -13 10.6
3 -228 -4.6 25.8 -0.69 -12.9 5.7
Table 20: Column forces in the 4th basement
According the equation Φ Pn (max) = 0.80ø [0.85f’c (Ag – Ast) + fyAst], where Φ=0.65,
f’c=35 MPa and Ast assumed as 3%, a section of 550x550mm would we adequate for
resisting the axial force on C23 column, but the design section is larger due to high
biaxial moment effects acting on the section.
C23 column is taken as an example of ETABS column design and illustrated in detail in
the following tables. Reinforcement detailing is provided as well.
46
ETABS 2013 Concrete Frame Design
ACI 318-11 Column Section Design
Column Element Details (Flexural Details)
Level Element Section ID Combo ID Station Loc Length (mm) LLRF Type
B4 C23 C80x80 Comb5ic(Envelope Static) 0 3000 0.4 Sway Special
Section Properties
b (mm) h (mm) dc (mm) Cover (Torsion) (mm)

800 800 50 17.3
Material Properties
Ec (MPa) f'c (MPa) Lt.Wt Factor (Unitless) fy (MPa) fys (MPa)

27806 35 1 413 413
Design Code Parameters
ΦT ΦCTied ΦCSpiral ΦVns ΦVs ΦVjoint

0.9 0.65 0.75 0.75 0.6 0.85
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 %
11746.2555 460.9231 -709.4527 460.9231 460.9231 10129 1.58
Factored & Minimum Biaxial Moments
NonSway Mns Sway Ms Factored Mu Minimum Mmin Minimum Eccentricity

kN-m kN-m kN-m kN-m mm
Major Bending(Mu3) -709.4527 0 -709.4527 460.9231 39.2
Minor Bending(Mu2) 155.0855 0 155.0855 460.9231 39.2
Axial Force and Biaxial Moment Factors
Cm Factor δns Factor δs Factor K Factor Length

Unitless Unitless Unitless Unitless mm
Major Bend(M3) 0.522102 1 1 1 3000
Minor Bend(M2) 0.4 1 1 1 3000
Table 21: ETABS flexural design data of C23 column section
47
ETABS 2013 Concrete Frame Design
ACI 318-11 Column Section Design
Column Element Details (Shear Details)
Level Element Section ID Combo ID Station Loc Length (mm) LLRF Type
B4 C23 C80x80 Comb5ic(Envelope Static) 0 3000 0.4 Sway Special
Section Properties
b (mm) h (mm) dc (mm) Cover (Torsion) (mm)

800 800 50 17.3
Material Properties
Ec (MPa) f'c (MPa) Lt.Wt Factor (Unitless) fy (MPa) fys (MPa)

27806 35 1 413 413
Shear Design for Vu2, Vu3
Rebar Av /s Design Vu Design Pu Design Mu ΦVc ΦVs ΦVn

mm²/m kN kN kN-m kN kN kN
Major Shear(V2) 0 299.8167 11746.2555 -548.6075 1030.5642 0 1030.5642
Minor Shear(V3) 0 98.1831 11746.2555 202.573 1030.5642 0 1030.5642
Design Forces
Factored Vu Factored Pu Factored Mu

kN kN kN-m
Major Shear(V2) 299.8167 9175.5855 -709.4527
Minor Shear(V3) 98.1831 9175.5855 155.0855
Design Basis
Shr Reduc Factor Strength fys Strength fcs Area Ag

Unitless MPa MPa cm²
1 413 35 6400
Concrete Shear Capacity
Design Vu Conc.Area Acu Tensn.Rein Ast

kN cm² mm²
Major Shear(V2) 299.8167 6000 5064
Minor Shear(V3) 98.1831 6000 5064
Shear Rebar Design
Stress v Conc.Cpcty vc Uppr.Limit vmax Φvc Φvmax RebarArea Av /s

MPa MPa MPa MPa MPa mm²/m
Major Shear(V2) 0.5 2.29 6.22 1.72 0 0
Minor Shear(V3) 0.16 2.29 6.22 1.72 4.67 0
Table 22: ETABS shear design data of C23 column section
48
Rebar selection rules are provided to the software for detailing.
Figure 30: Column rebar selection rules in ETABS
Figure 31: C23 rebar details in 3D view
49
Figure 34: C23 design schedule from base to staircase
Figure 32: Design section "E" for C23 column

Figure 33: Design section "C" for C23 column
50
2.2 Wall Design:
Two groups of walls are used in the model; exterior walls of 30 cm thickness and interior
walls of 20 cm thickness. The first group of walls mainly resists the lateral earth pressure
induced by the backfill soil; therefore M22 and V23 are the governing forces for design. The
second group acts mainly as bearing walls.
Figure 35: Plan view of external basement walls
Maximum values of flexural moment M22 and shear V23 are found in the wall section
shown in Figure34. M22 and V23 values are plotted in the following diagrams. The
maximum moment value occurs at the bottom and corresponds to 115 kN-m/m. The
maximum V23 value also occurs at the bottom and corresponds to 128 kN/m. This
external wall is supported by the basement slabs.
51
Figure 36: Extruded 3D view of external basement wall
The 3D Figure 35shows the external basement wall having pin supports at the bottom and
supported by slabs of B4, B3, B2 and B1.
52
Figure 36: M22 values for the external basement wall
Figure 37: V23 values for the external basement wall
According the equation , substituting the maximum

moment value of 115 kN.m/m, section strip width of 1000 mm and 300 mm as the
effective depth of section, the reinforcement ratio is 0.35%, which is almost the same
reinforcement ratio of 0.31 % that the software has provided.
53
Story Pier Station Design Edge End Rebar Min. Current Pier Leg Leg X1 Leg Y1 Leg X2 Leg Shear
Label Type Rebar Rebar Spacing Reinf. Reinf. mm mm mm mm Y2 Rebar
mm % % mm mm2/m
B1 P30 Top Uniform 12 14 250 0.25 0.31 Top Leg 47225 346 48133 769 750
1
B1 P30 Bottom Uniform 12 14 250 0.25 0.31 Bottom 47225 346 48133 769 750
Leg 1
1
Leg 1
1
Leg 1
1
Leg 1
Table 23: ETABS report for uniform basement wall reinforcement
54
For the interior walls, flexure and shear values as well as reinforcement data are reported. The
following figures show M22 and V23 values in an interior wall section where the maximum
values of forces are found.
Figure 38: M22 values for interior wall section
Maximum value of M22 is reported at the bottom of the wall section and corresponds to 54
kN-m/m. A hand calculated reinforcement ratio for this flexural force is 0.37 %. ETABS
has provided a reinforcement ratio of 0.49 to 0.67, which is larger than the hand-calculated
reinforcement values.
55
Figure 39:V23 values for interior wall section
Maximum value of V23 is reported at the bottom of the wall section and corresponds to 70
kN/m.
The table next page provides reinforcement data for all interior walls with 20cm section
thickness in the whole building.
56
Pier Rebar Min. Current Pier Leg Leg Leg Leg Shear
Design Edge End
Story Label Station Spacing Reinf Reinf Leg X1 Y1 X2 Y2 Rebar
Type Rebar Rebar
mm % % mm mm mm mm mm mm2/m
Stair Top 360 2779 3601 2974
P20 Top Uniform 12 14 250 0.25 0.67 500
Case Leg 1 12 2 2 2
Botto
Stair 388 2681 3886 2974
P20 Bottom Uniform 12 14 250 0.25 0.48 m Leg 500
Case 67 7 7 2
1
Top 124 1354 1244 1554
Roof2 P20 Top Uniform 12 14 250 0.25 0.67 500
Leg 1 49.7 2 9.7 2
Botto
101 1204 1442 1204
Roof2 P20 Bottom Uniform 12 14 250 0.25 0.49 m Leg 500
13.6 2 6 2
1
Top 124 1354 1244 1554
Roof1 P20 Top Uniform 12 14 250 0.25 0.67 500
Leg 1 49.7 2 9.7 2
Botto
124 1354 1244 1554
Roof1 P20 Bottom Uniform 12 14 250 0.25 0.49 m Leg 500
49.7 2 9.7 2
1
Top 124 1354 1244 1554
F5 P20 Top Uniform 12 14 250 0.25 0.67 500
Leg 1 49.7 2 9.7 2
Botto
124 1354 1244 1554
F5 P20 Bottom Uniform 12 14 250 0.25 0.49 m Leg 500
49.7 2 9.7 2
1
Top 124 1354 1244 1554
F4 P20 Top Uniform 12 14 250 0.25 0.67 500
Leg 1 49.7 2 9.7 2
Botto
124 1354 1244 1554
49.7 2 9.7 2
1
Top 124 1354 1244 1554
F3 P20 Top Uniform 12 14 250 0.25 0.67 500
Leg 1 49.7 2 9.7 2
Botto
124 1354 1244 1554
49.7 2 9.7 2
1
57
Top 124 1354 1244 1554
F2 P20 Top Uniform 12 14 250 0.25 0.67 500
Leg 1 49.7 2 9.7 2
Botto
124 1354 1244 1554
49.7 2 9.7 2
1
Top 124 1354 1244 1554
F1 P20 Top Uniform 12 14 250 0.25 0.67 500
Leg 1 49.7 2 9.7 2
Botto
124 1354 1244 1554
49.7 2 9.7 2
1
MEZZAN Top 124 1354 1244 1554
P20 Top Uniform 12 14 250 0.25 0.67 500
-INE Leg 1 49.7 2 9.7 2
Botto
MEZZAN 124 1354 1244 1554
P20 Bottom Uniform 12 14 250 0.25 0.49 m Leg 500
-INE 49.7 2 9.7 2
1
Top 124 1354 1244 1554
GF P20 Top Uniform 12 14 250 0.25 0.67 500
Leg 1 49.7 2 9.7 2
Botto
124 1354 1244 1554
GF P20 Bottom Uniform 12 14 250 0.25 0.49 m Leg 500
49.7 2 9.7 2
1
Top 124 1354 1244 1554
B1 P20 Top Uniform 12 14 250 0.25 0.66 500
Leg 1 49.7 2 9.7 2
Botto
124 1354 1244 1554
B1 P20 Bottom Uniform 12 14 250 0.25 0.48 m Leg 500
49.7 2 9.7 2
1
Table 24: ETABS report for uniform interior wall reinforcement
58
In ETABS, all walls need to be labeled as piers so that the software would be able to provide
reinforcement detailing values and graphics. Personal preferences for rebar selection are also
provided to ETABS.
Figure 40: Rebar selection prefrences for walls
The software calculates all forces in wall sections and provides the required steel ratio and
the minimum reinforcement according to ACI-318-11 Code. The uniform reinforcement option
is selected; therefore reinforcement values are uniform in all wall sections having the same
pier label. 30cm walls are labeled as Pier30 and 20cm walls are labeled as Pier20.
59
Figure 41: 3D view of confined wall reinforcement at corners
60
`
Figure 42: Reinforced section in internal shear wall
61
`
Figure 43: Elevation section of internal wall reinforcement
62
2.3 Slab Design:
Each roof is exported to SAFE V12 for design. SAFE designs slabs for flexure and
punching shear in accordance with ACI-318-08. There are two methods for design; a finite-
element-based method and a strip-based one. For this project, the strip-based design is used
since it allows for rebar calculations, while the finite-element-based approach checks rebar
area provided by designer against actual stresses in the slab. Moreover, design strips can be
used for rebar detailing.
Procedure of slab design is SAFE V12 is outlined below:
Drawing design strips along the X and Y axes. Design strips are called Strip A and
Strip B respectively. Strips for each axis are divided into two types; column strips
that are drawn along column centerlines and middle strips drawn between each two
rows of columns (in mid-spans). All strips have a width of 1 meter.
Figure 44: Screen capture of design strips menu in SAFE v12
Note that SAFE draws strips from centerlines, which means that a 1 meter strip is
assigned as 0.5 meters from right and 0.5 meters from left. Design strips may cross
slab openings and/or extrude slab outer lines, but this does not affect analysis or
design results.
Load combinations are checked (already exported from ETABS model) and the
Strength (ultimate) Design Method is selected.
“Run and Design” is carried out; the designer inspects strip forces and compares
them with forces based on a finite element analysis. The values of shear and moment
are almost identical everywhere in the slab.
Only slabs for the 4th basement, ground floor and 1st roof are designed. This
selection of slabs is based upon variation in live load values.
63
2.3.1. 4th Basement Slab Design
Flexure and shear values are reported by SAFE. SAFE also provides reinforcement steel
in accordance with ACI-318-08 Code. This slab is solid with no drop panels and has a
thickness of 25cm.
For design strips, MSA stand for middle strip-A and CSA stands for column strip-A.
Figure 45: X-axis design strips for 4th basement slabs
Figure 46: CSA_3 moment diagram
64
Conc Width FTopMoment FTopArea FTopAMin FBotMoment FBotArea FBotAMin V Force VArea Global X Global Y
2 2 2 2 2 Status
m kN.m mm mm kN.m mm mm kN mm /m m m
0.5177 -34.4186 491.497 240.933 2.6667 135.259 0 45.157 0 OK 51.71601 12.042

1 -0.1726 374.834 465.396 14.0022 277.36 0 86.941 0 OK 51.004 12.042
1 0 146.421 0 35.7218 485.884 465.396 30.496 0 OK 50.262 12.042
1 -127.3975 1669.485 465.396 0.0193 0 0 157.117 861.845 OK 45.262 12.042
1 -60.5339 765.834 465.396 0 0 0 157.117 861.845 OK 44.867 12.042
1 -10.9128 134.806 465.396 1.1423 14.048 0 52.217 0 OK 43.867 12.042
1 0 0 0 9.9952 123.418 465.396 15.758 0 OK 42.867 12.042
1 0 0 0 9.9846 123.286 465.396 11.761 0 OK 41.867 12.042
1 -3.09 38.034 465.396 1.2232 15.043 0 28.424 0 OK 40.867 12.042
1 -36.8601 461.063 465.396 0.0422 0 0 28.424 0 OK 39.867 12.042
1 -357.0576 5161.406 465.396 0 946.911 0 340.187 2820.612 OK 38.867 12.042
1 -82.3367 1053.254 465.396 0 0 0 340.187 2820.612 OK 38.012 12.042
1 -14.5507 180.049 465.396 2.8689 35.309 0 67.778 0 OK 37.012 12.042
1 -0.02 0 0 34.8068 434.843 465.396 41.713 0 OK 36.012 12.042
1 0 0 0 57.5723 727.293 465.396 26.256 0 OK 35.012 12.042
1 0 0 0 69.0246 876.982 465.396 13.978 0 OK 34.012 12.042
1 0 0 0 71.0779 904.01 465.396 4.913 0 OK 33.012 12.042
1 0 0 0 69.4167 882.139 465.396 12.769 0 OK 32.588 12.042
1 0 0 0 58.7434 742.518 465.396 24.532 0 OK 31.588 12.042
1 0 0 0 37.6057 470.443 465.396 38.952 0 OK 30.588 12.042
1 -7.3336 90.442 465.396 4.0817 50.263 0 56.092 0 OK 29.588 12.042
1 -66.5377 844.326 465.396 0 0 0 231.155 1212.478 OK 28.588 12.042
1 -265.5921 3801.853 465.396 0 0 0 231.155 1212.478 OK 27.588 12.042
1 -105.2553 1362.75 465.396 0 0 0 163.827 861.845 OK 27.126 12.042
1 -32.4039 404.358 465.396 0.0217 0 0 72.5 0 OK 26.126 12.042
1 -0.4702 5.781 0 10.8523 134.055 465.396 36.255 0 OK 25.126 12.042
1 0 0 0 28.1028 349.968 465.396 20.927 0 OK 24.126 12.042
Table 25: CSA3 forces and reinforcement reported by SAFE in B4 slab
65
Figure 47: Moment Diagrams for all A-strips in 4th basement slab
66
Figure 48: Moment Diagrams for all B-strips in 4th basement slab
67
2.3.2. First-Roof Slab Design
The roof slab has a relatively high live load of 4.8 kN/m2; therefore design is expected to
be different. This slab is solid with a thickness of 25cm and having drop panels of 40cm
thickness (15cm extrusion below slab surface) as stated earlier in the preliminary design.
Figure 50: Moment diagrams in both A&B strips for 1st-roof slab
Maximum negative and maximum positive moments are 689 kN.m and 96.7 kN.m are
reported respectively in the CSA2 strip in the slab.
Figure 49: Design-strip moment diagram with max. values
68
ConcWidth FTopMoment FTopArea FTopAMin FBotMoment FBotArea FBotAMin VForce VArea GlobalX GlobalY
Status
m kN.m mm2 mm2 kN.m mm2 mm2 kN mm2/m m m
1 -265.0206 2107.761 744.634 0 229.749 0 158.399 861.845 OK 27.126 12.042

1 -692.2001 5925.636 744.634 0 201.323 0 510.627 2329.948 OK 27.588 12.042
1 -174.8691 2388.936 465.396 0 220.075 0 510.627 2329.948 OK 28.588 12.042
1 -43.3142 577.721 465.396 0 130.779 0 136.563 0 OK 29.588 12.042
1 -0.0868 125.632 0 35.1028 473.076 465.396 77.354 0 OK 30.588 12.042
1 0 111.039 0 74.6225 979.651 465.396 43.957 0 OK 31.588 12.042
1 0 107.217 0 93.4558 1229.757 465.396 22.479 0 OK 32.588 12.042
1 0 98.449 0 96.4577 1268.027 465.396 8.943 0 OK 33.012 12.042
1 0 97.796 0 93.3042 1224.313 465.396 23.05 0 OK 34.012 12.042
1 0 97.202 0 74.1228 969.458 465.396 44.788 0 OK 35.012 12.042
1 -0.0931 110.065 0 34.046 455.534 465.396 78.841 0 OK 36.012 12.042
1 -46.6357 625.263 465.396 0 147.345 0 146.988 0 OK 37.012 12.042
1 -187.5513 2582.8 465.396 0 366.405 0 605.309 3169.326 OK 38.012 12.042
1 -736.1775 6401.231 744.634 0 374.324 0 605.309 3169.326 OK 38.867 12.042
1 -85.5196 1095.772 465.396 0 0 0 74.946 0 OK 39.867 12.042
Table 26: Forces and Reinforcement as reported by SAFE for max. design strip in 1st Roof
69
2.4 Mat Foundation Design:
This is the structural system used in this project for supporting the building. The use of this
type of foundation reduces the potential of differential settlement. The relation between
stresses in the mat slab and the downward vertical settlement is defined as the soil sub-grade
modulus (K).
An initial check of the model under this service load combination (D+L) resulted in a base
reaction of 162,500 kN. With soil capacity of 250kN/m2 the required foundation area is
650m2 which is way less than the area of the foundation provided in the model. Modulus of
sub-grade used is K=25000 kN/m3.
Before starting the first run, all points are selected and released in the vertical Z direction,
and then soil sub-grade property is applied as area springs. An initial check of punching
shear results for the mat foundation shows that drop panels of 70cm below columns are not
adequate for resisting punching shear stress at some locations where shearing stress reached
twice that of the section’s capacity. Depth of drop panel had to be increased to 120cm in
order to resist punching shear stress.
The major concerns when designing foundations are; foundation uplifts and soil allowable
pressure. There should be no behavior of uplift in the mat foundation (tension in soil) and
the allowable soil pressure must not be exceeded at any part in the foundation. The
following table reports SAFEv12 values of soil pressure.
Surface Pressure
Area
(kN/m2)
F1 -112.98
F1 -137.1
F1 -156.3
F1 -156.29
F2 -0.57
F2 -20.15
F2 -18.83
F2 -0.91
F3 -118.7
F3 -118.92
F3 -99
F3 -98.7
F4 -98.7
F4 -99
F4 -62.53
F4 -60.07
F5 -60.07
F5 -62.53
F5 -32.98
F5 -26.27
F6 -26.27
70
F6 -32.98
F6 -21.96
F6 -9.09
Surface Pressure
Area
(kN/m2)
F9 -20.15
F9 -81.08
F9 -72.42
F9 -18.83
F10 -81.08
F10 -173.56
F10 -162.77
F10 -72.42
F11 -173.56
F11 -238.77
F11 -233.9
F11 -162.77
F12 -238.77
F12 -244.54
F12 -237.08
F12 -233.9
F13 -188.48
F13 -178.84
F13 -233.9
F13 -237.08
F14 -178.84
F14 -125.78
F14 -162.77
F14 -233.9
F15 -9.09
F15 -21.96
F15 -21.34
F15 -3.36
F22 -125.78
F22 -64.06
F22 -72.42
F22 -162.77
F23 -64.06
F23 -27.07
F23 -18.83
F23 -72.42
F24 -27.07
F24 -13.7
F24 -0.91
F24 -18.83
F26 -137.1
Table 27: Soil Pressure
71
All pressure values have a negative sign which means that soil is subjected to compressive
forces only and no uplift in the foundation. Maximum and minimum absolute pressure value
highlighted in red is 244.54 kN/m2; it is less than the allowable soil pressure; 250 kN/m2.
The 25 cm mat thickness selected in the ETABS model is not adequate for resisting flexure
because the required reinforcement exceeded the maximum allowed. Thickness was
increased to 30 cm and resulted in an acceptable reinforcement ratio.
Figure 51: Moment diagram of A-strips in mat foundation
Maximum positive moment = 4318.3 kN-m occurs in column-strip A at section with

thickness of 120 cm.
Maximum negative moment = 283.6 kN.m occurs in column-strip B at section with

thickness of 30 cm.
72
Figure 52: Moment diagrams of B strips in mat foundation
Moment Section Depth Reinforcement

Section Width As,hand (mm2) As,SAFE (mm2)
kN.m mm Ratio
4318.3 1200 1000 0.0088 10,610 10877
-283.6 300 1000 0.0093 2,797 3344
Table 28: SAFE vs. hand-calculated values for mat reinforcement
The table above is a verification of steel reinforcement provided by SAFEv12 for maximum
negative and positive moments in the mat foundation. Now SAFE has provided steel
reinforcement areas for all strips in the mat foundation. For detailing, the designer has to
provide his own preferences for rebar diameters and spacing.
73
Figure 53: Mat foundation detailing preferences
74
CHAPTER III:
EARTHQUAKE ANALYSIS & DESIGN
1. Background
Earthquakes can cause disastrous damage to structures if the forces they induce are
sufficiently greater than the capacity of structural elements in the structure. The potential
seismic forces that may hit the Gateway Building should be studied. Behavior of the gravity-
loaded structure will be investigated against lateral dynamic forces. Two methods are used
for calculating seismic forces; the equivalent static lateral load method and the response
spectrum method.
For gravity loads, the elevator cores and internal walls in the model act as bearing walls,
while walls in the outer perimeter act as bearing walls and resist shear and moment due to
lateral earth pressure from soil backfill in the basement levels. Analysis complies with 1997
UBC Code.
2. Geology
The Gateway building is located in al-Irsal Street, Ramallah. This zone is classified as 2A
with both the acceleration seismic and the velocity seismic coefficients (Ca and Cv) equal
to 0.15 because soil is classified as rock,SB. This is considered a moderate-risk zone
according to UBC97.
Figure 54: Seismic zone factor map
75
3. Modal Analysis
This is a linear analysis that is used to determine the vibration modes of the structure.
These modes are useful to understand the dynamic behavior of the structure and form
the basis of the Response Spectrum Analysis.
The Eigenvector analysis is used to find the modes of The Gateway Building. The
number of modes this analysis can provide is equal to the mass degrees of freedom
found in the model, but usually for such buildings the first modes are sufficient.
Eigenvector analysis reports values as Eigenvalues. An Eigenvalue is the square of the
circular frequency (

 
Where K is the stiffness and M is the mass participating in the dynamic analysis,
therefore the mass source must be well-defined in order to provide correct dynamic
behavior for the structure.
The mass participating in the dynamic behavior of the structure comprises of self-mass
of the structure plus superimposed dead load and a portion of live load; 0.3.
Figure 55: Mass source Definition
76
Circular
Period Frequency Eigenvalue
Mode Frequency
(Seconds) (cycle/second) (rad2/sec2)
(rad/sec)
1 1.102 0.907 5.7019 32.5119
2 0.931 1.074 6.748 45.5361
3 0.511 1.956 12.2874 150.9794
4 0.268 3.736 23.4749 551.0726
5 0.227 4.408 27.6991 767.2421
6 0.143 6.974 43.82 1920.1896
7 0.128 7.793 48.9648 2397.5558
8 0.121 8.296 52.1273 2717.2537
9 0.097 10.301 64.7201 4188.687
10 0.088 11.346 71.2888 5082.0939
11 0.083 12.116 76.125 5795.0088
12 0.074 13.576 85.2979 7275.7348
13 0.069 14.469 90.9094 8264.5268
14 0.065 15.368 96.5631 9324.4252
15 0.063 15.997 100.5101 10102.2897
16 0.059 16.899 106.1809 11274.3828
17 0.058 17.216 108.1725 11701.2977
18 0.058 17.374 109.1661 11917.2423
19 0.054 18.58 116.7427 13628.8596
20 0.053 18.872 118.5737 14059.7315
Table 29: Modal analysis output
The UBC-97 code states in section 1631.5.2 that at least 90 percent of the participating
mass of the structure is included in the calculations for each principal horizontal
direction. This code requirement necessitated 20 modes to be inspected since 12 modes
were not enough to satisfy the code requirement.
Direction Static Dynamic

UX 99.98 93.54
UY 99.98 93.49
Table 30: Modal mass participating ratios
4. Equivalent Lateral Load Method
The Equivalent Lateral Load Method is based on simplified procedure that substitutes
potential dynamic forces for their equivalent static ones based on code provisions and
factors. For analysis, equivalent static base shear is program-calculated based on the
input values according to the UBC-97 Code. This method gives a good indication of
story shears.
77
Parameter Value
T (seconds) 1.1
R 4.5
Soil profile type SB
Z 0.15
Ca 0.15
Cv 0.15
I 1.0
Table 31: Parameters of Equivalent Lateral Load Method
T, structure period in seconds, is determined according to ETABS output for the

first mode of the structure. The software provided a value of 1.1 seconds.
Method A in Section 1630.2.2 in the UBC-97 Code provides an equation to
approximate T.
T= Ct (hn)3/4
Where, Ct= 0.03, a numerical coefficient.
hn= 137.8 ft, height of the building in feet.
This equation yielded a structure period of 1.2 seconds. This values is not significantly
different from the values provided by ETABS.
R, the over-strength factor that considers global ductility capacity of lateral-force-

resisting systems. This factor makes the design forces less than the forces
induced by the earthquake. The Gateway Building’s lateral-force-resisting
structural system is classified as concrete shear-walls. Table 16-N in the UBC-97
Code provides R values for common structural systems.
Table 32: Table 16-N from UBC-97 Code
SB, soil profile type as in Table 16-J in the UBC-97 Code. Soil on site is classified
as rock.
78
Z, seismic zone factor. The UBC-97 Code provides values for Z for all regions in
the world. For this analysis practice, the value of Z is taken from Earth Sciences
and Seismic Engineering Center at An-Najah University.
Ca, seismic coefficient from Table 16-Q in the UBC Code.
Cv, seismic coefficient from Table 16-R in the UBC Code.
I, Importance factor that depends on occupancy category as in Table 16-K.
Equivalent lateral load is defined as a load pattern in ETABS in both X and Y directions.
This resulted in a 4142 kN base shear in the both X and Y-directions. Load patterns are
denoted by ELLMX and ELLMY.
Figure 56: Story shears in X-direction due to ELLMX
Figure 57: Story shears in Y-direction due to ELLMY
79
5. Response Spectrum Analysis
Elastic dynamic analysis of a structure utilizes the peak dynamic response of all effective
modes. The response spectrum curve is a plot of period and acceleration based on
statistical data for each location.
For Ca and Cv values of 0.15 and a damping ratio of 5%, the UBC-97 Code provides a
response spectrum curve.
Response Spectrum Curve

0.45
0.4
0.35
0.3
Acceleration
0.25
0.2
0.15
0.1
0.05
0
0.00 2.00 4.00 6.00 8.00 10.00 12.00
Period
Figure 58: Response spectrum curve
Proper modal combinations are assigned into ETABS in order to utilize the response all
effective modes. Defining a modal combination is essential since peak modal responses
occur at different times. The CQC (complete quadratic combination) method is used for
modal combination.
80
6. Load Combinations
Load combinations of static gravity forces are added to dynamic forces.
Comb5: U=Envelope (Comb1, Comb2, Comb3, Comb4)

Comb6: U=1.2D + 1.0L + 1.0S + 1.0H + 1.0E
Comb7: U=1.2D + 1.0L + 1.0S + 1.0H - 1.0E
Comb8: U=Envelope(Comb5, Comb6, Comb7)
Table 33l: Load combinations for earthquake loads
7. Results
All story drifts are below maximum allowable drifts in the UBC-97 Code. Design
philosophy is based on the idea of assuring life safety during earthquakes, therefore,
some structural elements may undergo plastic deformations due to seismic forces but
this will not cause threat to the life of the building’s occupants.
81
8. Structural Design for Dynamic Loads
The main concern is the lateral forces induced to the structure by the earthquakes.
Structural elements’ that are designed to resist gravity static forces are expected to fail
under dynamic loading. Capacity of elements designed in the linear static stage of the
project will be re-evaluated after applying dynamic loads, and necessary changes to their
design will be carried out if needed. Design under dynamic loads is compared to design
under static loads.
8.1 Mat Foundation Design
The mat foundation is subjected to the summation of all story shears in the building. Soil
is assumed to be the same as in the static analysis; linear with modulus of 25,000 kN/m 3.
The pressure in any point in the mat foundation must not exceed 250 kN/m2, that is the
maximum allowable soil pressure. Tension or uplift forces on the soil are not allowed as
well.
For resisting gravity static forces, a mat foundation thickness of 30cm thickness with
120cm drop panels under columns was dubbed adequate. This design is re-evaluated
under dynamic lateral load.
The first design trial deemed a 30cm thickness adequate for resisting flexure and shear
forces and provided reinforcement ratios that satisfy minimum requirement and are
below maximum allowed limit, but soil pressure exceeded maximum allowable limit and
there were tensile forces acting on the soil as shown in next table.
MaxPress MinPress GlobalXMax GlobalYMax GlobalXMin GlobalYMin

kN/m2 kN/m2 m m m m
8.98 -389.72 33.012 16.042 27.588 13.042
Table 34: Soil pressure summary due to combined lateral and gravity loads
Excessive pressure on soil can be treated by increasing the mat foundation stiffness. This
is achieved by increasing the thickness. Both uplift and excessive pressure on soil were
treated by increasing mat thickness to 60cm.
MaxPress MinPress GlobalXMax GlobalYMax GlobalXMin GlobalYMin

kN/m2 kN/m2 m m m m
-22 -241 8.410 35.658 14.426 17.042
Table 35: Soil pressure summary for a 60cm-thick foundation
82
Section
Design Strip thickness
mm
Max. negative
moment 4613.6221 1200
(kN.m)
Max. positive
moment 513.2 600
(kN.m)
Max. shear
3275.746 1200
(kN)
Table 36: Max. forces in the mat foundation due to dynamic load
The table above reports maximum moment and shear force in the mat foundation slab.
The difference between these forces and the forces reported due to static gravity loads
are not significantly different.
83
8.2 Slabs Design
Slab thickness and reinforcement ratios adequacy is judged based on dynamic loading.
8.2.1. Fourth Basement Slab Design
The design completed for gravity loads will be checked against dynamic lateral loads.
Design strips are defined as stated earlier.
SAFE V12 has shown that the thickness of 25cm is adequate and is able to resist the
lateral load.
Figure 59: CSA3 moment diagram for Comb8
Moment values due to Comb8 are not significantly different from those due to Comb5,
therefore slab thickness is adequate. Some variations in reinforcement values have been
found. As per punching shear design, it was determined that the use of drop panels for
basement floors slabs is unnecessary. Under dynamic loading, 40cm drop panels had to
be used because punching shear ratios exceeded 1 at many locations.
Point Global X Global Y Status Ratio VU

2088 19.126 25.842 OK 0.825018 556.497
2089 19.126 18.892 OK 0.657269 244.066
2090 19.126 12.042 OK 0.634517 217.287
2091 19.126 5.742 Failed 1.176682 650.936
2092 27.588 25.842 OK 0.926061 496.443
2093 27.588 18.892 OK 0.779566 720.752
2094 27.588 12.042 OK 0.792111 716.204
2095 27.588 5.742 OK 0.927096 738.724
2096 38.867 12.042 Failed 1.150031 629.302
2097 38.867 5.742 Failed 1.402556 662.195
2098 38.867 18.892 Failed 1.024411 613.127
2099 45.262 25.842 Failed 1.119385 715.722
Table 37: Punching shear data for 4th basement slab
All punching shear calculations are based on the slab’s effective depth of 217mm.
84
After adding drop panels, all punching shear ratios were below 1.
Point Global X Global Y Status Ratio VU

2088 19.126 25.842 OK 0.51545 588.531
2089 19.126 18.892 OK 0.387563 414.934
2090 19.126 12.042 OK 0.392851 388.707
2091 19.126 5.742 OK 0.642104 682.224
2092 27.588 25.842 OK 0.662842 633.553
2093 27.588 18.892 OK 0.464407 727.141
2094 27.588 12.042 OK 0.472063 707.536
2095 27.588 5.742 OK 0.533066 788.709
2096 38.867 12.042 OK 0.684385 596.694
2097 38.867 5.742 OK 0.742246 686.242
2098 38.867 18.892 OK 0.63552 609.602
2099 45.262 25.842 OK 0.721301 846.306
Table 38: Punching shear data for 4th basement slab with drop panels
Reinforcement details for the 4th basement slab are shown in the appendix.
85
CHAPTER IV: Structural Design Summary & Conclusion
1. Structural Design Summary
Analysis via a numerical model and the application of reinforced-concrete design

principles that comply with the ACI-318-11 Code have resulted in a section of 60-cm
depth with 120-cm drop panels below columns for punching-shear resistance. As for
columns, the largest section is square-shaped with 80-cm side length, and the smallest
section is also a square with 30-cm length. Exterior walls that resist the seismic lateral
forces as well as gravity forces have a 30-cm thick section with reinforcement ratios 3
times greater than the minimum ratio advised by the code. Interior walls have a section
of 20-cm. For slabs, all floors have slabs with 25-cm thickness with drop panels
protruding 15-cm below slab (total thickness of 40-cm) for resisting punching shear
forces.
2. Conclusion
This project group has come up with many conclusions regarding analysis and reinforced
concrete design. Conclusions are summed as follows:
Flat-plate slab systems are very efficient and can be used for relatively long spans in
commercial buildings. This practice is proven by eliminating numerous columns that
were considered superfluous.
Column-drop panels are good for both increasing punching shear capacity of the
section and for negative moment resistance. They have also been found to reduce
deflection along the span.
For numerical modeling, the shell-element is best used for modeling shear walls and
slabs for they take into consideration both in-plane and out-of-plane bending
behavior in addition to axial forces.
The soil supporting the structure did undergo excessive pressures and tensile forces
at some locations due to the lateral forces induced by the earthquake, therefore, the
mat thickness had to be doubled. This practice may not be economical but is
justified.
86
APPENDIX
Reinforcement Detailing
87

Technical Report For A Structural Design Project

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Technical Report For A Structural Design Project

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

AN-NAJAH NATIONAL UNIVERSITY

Supervisor: Dr. Samir H. Helou

CHAPTER I: INTRODUCTION & NUMERICAL MODELING ........................................9

CHAPTER II: LINEAR STATIC ANALYSIS & DESIGN ................................................... 34

1. PRELIMINARY ANALYSIS RESULTS....................................................................................................................34

CHAPTER III: EARTHQUAKE ANALYSIS & DESIGN .................................................... 75

CHAPTER IV: STRUCTURAL DESIGN SUMMARY & CONCLUSION.......................... 86

1. STRUCTURAL DESIGN SUMMARY ....................................................................................................................86

Table 1: Codes Used for Analysis and Design ......................................................................................12

Figure 1: The Gateway Building ............................................................................................................... 9

Figure 1: The Gateway Building

Figure 2: Above-grade floors plan

3.1 Design Codes

UBC 97 Earthquake analysis

3.2 Materials Used

3.3.1. Dead Loads

Depth below Lateral earth

3.3.2. Snow Loads

Table 6: Load Combinations

3.5 Soil Conditions:

4.1 Model Geometry:

Model geometry creation steps:

Figure 5: Model units and design codes

Figure 6: Grid Systems 16

X Grid data Y Grid Data

Grid ID X Ordinate (cm) Grid ID Y Ordinate (cm)

Secondary Grid Lines

Grid ID X1 (cm) Y1 (cm) X2 (cm) Y2 (cm)

5411.4 3326 5100.4 574.2

2908.8 2584.2 2908.8 2974.2

Table 7: Cartesian Grid Data

Radial Grid Data

Grid ID R Ordinate (cm)

Grid ID T Ordinate (cm)

Table 8: Cylindrical Grid Data

Cylindrical System Origin

Global X (cm) 4526.2

Global Y (cm) 574.2

Rotation (deg) -90

Table 9: Cylindrical System Origin

Figure 8: Floors Labels

Stair Case 3000 42000

Figure 9: Story Data

4.2.1. The Frame Element:

Figure 10: Local coordinate system of the frame element

P, the axial force.

Frame element sections used in the model

Table 10: Frame element sections used in the model

Figure 11: Local coordinates of a column section

Figure 12: Area spring property data

Figure 13: Soil Modulus assignment to shells

The shell element is a three- or four-node element that combines both

Figure 14: Quadrilateral shell element

Figure 15: Shell element uniform coordinate systems

ETABS reports internal forces in shell element as the following:

4.2.3.1 The Mat Foundation:

Figure 16: 3D view of the mat foundation

Figure 17: Mat foundation section properties

Figure 18: 3D screen capture of the walls

Figure 19: 3D capture of the ramps

Figure 20: Ramp-wall connection

Figure 21: 3D screen capture of stair slabs

Figure 22: Slab mesh