Capstone Design 10-19-13 FINAL PRESENT

Design of Mixed Commercial and Residential7-Storey Condominium
Members
Dotillos, Jay G.
Famadico, Daryl M.
Logdat, Lizaflor J.
Mariano, Cesario Jr. S.
Rosas, Roy
Technological Institute of the Philippines

Quezon City
2013
Table of Contents
Design of Mixed Commercial and Residential7-Storey Condominium.............................................................1

Table of Contents..............................................................................................................................................2
List of Figures....................................................................................................................................................4
List of Tables.....................................................................................................................................................6
List of Acronyms................................................................................................................................................7
Chapter 1 : Project Background........................................................................................................................8
1.1 The Project..............................................................................................................................................8
1.2 Project Objectives...................................................................................................................................9
1.3 The Client................................................................................................................................................9
1.4 Project Scope and Limitations................................................................................................................9
1.5 Project Development..............................................................................................................................9
Chapter 2 : Design Inputs................................................................................................................................11
2.1 Description of the structure...................................................................................................................11
Chapter 3 : Constraints, Trade-offs and Standards........................................................................................23
3.1 Design Constraints...............................................................................................................................23
3.2 Trade-offs..............................................................................................................................................23
3.3 Design Standards.................................................................................................................................31
Chapter 4 : Design of Structure......................................................................................................................33
4.1 Methodology.........................................................................................................................................33
4.2 Structural Design..................................................................................................................................33
4.2.1 Design of structure using Rolled Sections....................................................................................34
4.2.2 Design of Structure using Built-up Sections.................................................................................63
4.2.3. Validation of Multiple Constraints, Trade-offs and Standards......................................................89
4.2.4. Influence of multiple constraints, trade-offs and standards in the Final Design..........................97
Chapter 5 : Final Design...............................................................................................................................104
References...............................................................................................................................................105
Appendices....................................................................................................................................................106
Appendix A: Final Design Schedule.........................................................................................................106
Appendix B: Initial Estimate of Sections and Connections.......................................................................119

Appendix C: Codes and Standards..........................................................................................................122
Appendix D: Manual Computations of Beam Members (Rolled Sections)..............................................136
Appendix E: Manual Computations of Column Members (Rolled Sections)...........................................145
Appendix F: Manual Computations of Simple Connection for Rolled Sections (DAB and DAW)............152
Appendix G: Manual Computation of Moment Connections for Rolled Sections (BFP and WFP)..........155
Appendix H: Manual Computation of Beam Members (Built-up Sections)..............................................159
Appendix I: Manual Computations of Column Members (Built-up Sections)...........................................168
Appendix J: Manual Computations ofSimple Connection for Built-up Sections (DAW & DAB)...............174
Appendix K: Manual Computations of Moment Connections for Built-up Sections (BFP & WFP)..........177
Appendix L: Final Estimate of Rolled Sections for the Entire Frame.......................................................181
Appendix M: Final Estimate of Built-up Sections for the Entire Frame....................................................183
Appendix N: Final Estimate of Simple Connections (Rolled & Built-up Sections)...................................185
Appendix O: Final Estimate of Moment Connections (Rolled & Built-up Sections).................................188
Appendix P: Manual Computation of Gravity Load Frame Connection...................................................193
Appendix Q: Manual Computation of Base Plate.....................................................................................198
Appendix R: Manual Computation of Slab...............................................................................................200
Appendix S: Manual Computation of Footings.........................................................................................202
Appendix T: Manual Computations of Stair..............................................................................................208
Appendix U: Geotechnical Report............................................................................................................215
Appendix V: Working Schedule................................................................................................................217
Appendix W: Minutes of Meetings............................................................................................................221
Appendix X: STAAD Pro License.............................................................................................................226
List of Figures
Figure 1-1 Perspective view of 7 storey condominium.....................................................................................8
Figure 1-2 Steps of design project..................................................................................................................10
Figure 2-1 Framing plan of the 7-storey condominium...................................................................................11
Figure 2-2 Front elevation & rear elevation....................................................................................................13
Figure 2-3 Right side and left side elevation..................................................................................................14
Figure 2-4 Basement level for parking lot.......................................................................................................15
Figure 2-5 Ground floor plan for commercial use...........................................................................................16
Figure 2-6 2nd to 7th floor plan for residential use.........................................................................................17
Figure 2-7 Roof deck plan...............................................................................................................................18
Figure 2-8 Occupancy plan for ground floor...................................................................................................19
Figure 2-9 Occupancy plan for 2nd to 7th floor..............................................................................................20
Figure 2-10 Framing plan for ground floor......................................................................................................21
Figure 2-11 Framing plan for 2nd to 7th floor.................................................................................................22
Figure 3-1 Ranking scale for percent difference.............................................................................................24
Figure 4-1 Flowchart of structural design.......................................................................................................33
Figure 4-2 Structural frame for Rolled Section...............................................................................................34
Figure 4-3 Orientation of girders, beams and columns for ground floor.........................................................35
Figure 4-4 Orientation of girders, beams and columns for 2nd to 7th floor....................................................36
Figure 4-5 Seismic-resisting frame of the structure........................................................................................37
Figure 4-6 Gravity load frame of the structure................................................................................................37
Figure 4-7 Foundation plan.............................................................................................................................38
Figure 4-8 Completed model of steel frame using STAAD Pro......................................................................43
Figure 4-9 Critical frame for seismic analysis.................................................................................................44
Figure 4-10 Displacement of the critical frame...............................................................................................45
Figure 4-11Bending stress for critical frame...................................................................................................45
Figure 4-12 Designers classification for connections.....................................................................................54
Figure 4-13 Double Angle Welded Connections (DAW-1)..............................................................................55
Figure 4-14 Double Angle Bolted Connections (DAB-1)................................................................................55
Figure 4-15 Orientation of intermediate beam for Simple Connection (DAW-1 and DAB-1).........................55
Figure 4-16 Sample design of Double Angle Welded connection (DAW-1)...................................................56
Figure 4-17 Effective area of fillet weld...........................................................................................................56
Figure 4-18 Sample design of Double Angle Bolted connection (DAB-1)......................................................57
Figure 4-19 Possible block shear failures (DAB-1).........................................................................................57
Figure 4-20 Seismic-resisting frame (WFP-1 and BFP-1)..............................................................................58
Figure 4-21 Bolted Flange Plate (BFP-1).......................................................................................................58
Figure 4-22 Welded Flange Plate (WFP-1)....................................................................................................58

Figure 4-23 Sample design of Welded Flange Plate (WFP-1).......................................................................59
Figure 4-24 Sample design of Bolted Flange Plate (BFP-1)..........................................................................59
Figure 4-25 Possible block shear (BFP-1)......................................................................................................60
Figure 4-26Structural frame for Built-up Section............................................................................................61
Figure 4-27 Orientation of girders, beams and columns for ground floor.......................................................62
Figure 4-28 Orientation of girders, beams and columns for 2nd to 7th floor..................................................63
Figure 4-29 Seismic-resisting frame of the structure......................................................................................64
Figure 4-30 Gravity load frame of the structure..............................................................................................64
Figure 4-31 Foundation plan...........................................................................................................................65
Figure 4-32 Completed model of steel frame using STAAD Pro....................................................................70
Figure 4-33 Critical frame for seismic analysis...............................................................................................71
Figure 4-34 Displacement of the critical frame...............................................................................................72
Figure 4-35 Bending stress for critical frame..................................................................................................72
Figure 4-36 Double Angle Welded Connections (DAW-1)..............................................................................79
Figure 4-37 Double Angle Bolted Connections (DAB-1)................................................................................79
Figure 4-38 Orientation of intermediate beam for Simple Connection (DAW-1 and DAB-1).........................79
Figure 4-39 Sample design of Double Angle Welded connection (DAW-1)...................................................80
Figure 4-40 Effective area of fillet weld...........................................................................................................80
Figure 4-41 Sample design of Double Angle Bolted Connection (DAB-1).....................................................81
Figure 4-42 Possible block shear failures (DAB-1).........................................................................................81
Figure 4-43 Seismic-resisting frame (WFP-1 and BFP-1)..............................................................................82
Figure 4-44 Bolted Flange Plate (BFP-1).......................................................................................................82
Figure 4-45 Welded Flange Plate (WFP-1)....................................................................................................82
Figure 4-46 Sample design of Welded Flange Plate (WFP-1).......................................................................83
Figure 4-47 Sample design of Bolted Flange Plate (BFP-1)..........................................................................83
Figure 4-48 Possible block shear (BFP-1)......................................................................................................84
Figure 4-49 Economical of sections................................................................................................................93
Figure 4-50 Manufacturability of sections.......................................................................................................94
Figure 4-51Storey drift of sections along Y-axis.............................................................................................95
Figure 4-52 Economical of simple shear connection......................................................................................96
Figure 4-53 Constructability of simple connections........................................................................................96
Figure 4-54 Maximum shear capacity of simple connection..........................................................................97
Figure 4-55 Economical of moment connection.............................................................................................98
Figure 4-56 Constructability of moment connection.......................................................................................98
Figure 4-57 Moment capacity of moment connection....................................................................................99
List of Tables
Table 2-1 Room Classification and Corresponding Area................................................................................12
Table 3-1Designer Raw Rankings for Sections..............................................................................................25
Table 3-2Initial Cost Estimate for Sections (Rolled and Built-up)...................................................................26
Table 3-3 Initial Duration of Construction for Sections (Built-up)....................................................................26
Table 3-4 Designer Raw Rankings for Simple Connections...........................................................................27
Table 3-5 Initial Cost Estimate for Simple Connections (DAB and DAW)......................................................28
Table 3-6 Initial Duration of Construction for Simple Connection (DAB and DAW).......................................28
Table 3-7 Designer Raw Rankings for Moment Connections.........................................................................29
Table 3-8 Initial Cost Estimate for Moment Connection (BFP and WFP).......................................................30
Table 3-9 Initial Duration of Construction for Moment Connection (BFP and WFP)......................................30
Table 4-1 Uniform Loads on Slab Produce by Gravity Loads in kPa.............................................................40
Table 4-2 Occupancy Live Loads....................................................................................................................41
Table 4-3 Load Combination used in STAAD Pro V8i....................................................................................41
Table 4-4 Tabulated Seismic Parameters.......................................................................................................42
Table 4-5 Wind Load Parameters...................................................................................................................43
Table 4-6 Maximum Moment in Critical frame................................................................................................44
Table 4-7 Trial Sections for Design of Beam..................................................................................................47
Table 4-8 Classification of W12 X 279 Rolled Section...................................................................................47
Table 4-9 Uniform Loads on Slab Produce by Gravity Loads in kPa.............................................................67
Table 4-10 Occupancy Live Loads..................................................................................................................68
Table 4-11 Load Combination used in STAAD Pro V8i...................................................................................68
Table 4-12 Tabulated Seismic Parameters.....................................................................................................69
Table 4-13 Wind Load Parameters.................................................................................................................70
Table 4-14 Maximum Moment in Critical frame..............................................................................................71
Table 4-15 Trial Sections for Design of Beam................................................................................................74
Table 4-16 Classification of BW 800 X 296 Rolled Section............................................................................74
Table 4-17 Designer Rankings for Sections...................................................................................................85
Table 4-18 Cost Estimate for Sections (Rolled and Built-up).........................................................................86
Table 4-19 Duration of Construction for Sections (Rolled and Built-up).........................................................87
Table 4-20 Safety of Sections against Lateral Force (Rolled and Built-up)....................................................87
Table 4-21 Designer Rankings for Simple Connections (Built-up Section)....................................................88
Table 4-22 Cost Estimate for Simple Connections (DAB Connections).........................................................89
Table 4-23 Cost Estimate for Simple Connections (DAW Connections)........................................................89
Table 4-24 Duration of Construction for Simple Connection (DAB and DAW)...............................................89
Table 4-25 Designer Rankings for Moment Connections (Built-up Section)..................................................90

Table 4-26 Cost Estimate for Moment Connection (BFP)..............................................................................91
Table 4-27 Cost Estimate for Moment Connection (WFP).............................................................................91
Table 4-28 Duration of Construction for Moment Connection (WFP and BFP)..............................................92
List of Acronyms
ASD
ASEP
AISC
ASCE
ASTM
Allowable Stress Design

Association of Structural Engineers of the Philippines
American Institute of Steel Construction
American Society of Civil Engineers
American Society for Testing and Materials
CJP
DAB
DAW
BFP
WFP
Complete Joint Penetration

Double Angle Bolted
Double Angle Welded
Bolted Flange Plate
Welded Flange Plate
NSCP
NBC
UBC
WSD
National Structural Code of the Philippines

National Building Code
Uniform Building Code
Working Stress Design
STAAD
SMAW
Structural Analysis and Design

Shield Metal Arc Welding
Chapter 1 : Project Background

1.1 The Project
The project is a seven storey mixed commercial and residential condominium building with basement and
roof deck to be constructed along Malakas street corner Matapang Street, Barangay Pinyahan, Diliman,
Quezon City. The purpose of the building is for commercial renting at the ground floor and sell units from 2 nd
to 7th floors. A part of the condominium offers commercial use that includes office and retail such as
convenience stores, health care etc.
The Commercial and Residential condominium is a rectangular shaped seven storey building that covers a
gross area of 5260 sq.m and total saleable area of 3165 sq.m from 2 nd to 7th floor. The ground floor is for
commercial use with five 39.2 sq.m units and seven office uses, and basement level intended for parking
lot with 13 slots. The structure is also designed to accommodate a spacious roof deck offering for other
uses and spectacular views. It has two access stairs located at every third point of its longitudinal section,
one facing east and the other facing west. An elevator at the center is available to easily and efficiently
move people or goods between floors especially disabled persons. The whole frame of the building was
designed as built-up sections and connections as governed in the trade-offs.
The designers present trade-off strategies in the design process. This work will permit designers to directly
specify and how to trade-off different design goals. In the design of mixed commercial and residential
condominium, a strategy is to trade-off the performance of rolled and built-up sections and the connections
of welds and bolts to be used in the framing of the structure.
8
Figure 1-1 Perspective view of 7 storey condominium
1.2 Project Objectives

The objectives of the project are to:
Design a seven storey condominium in accordance with codes and engineering standards
Evaluate the influence of multiple constraints dictated by the clients and design requirements,
tradeoffs and standards to come up with economical design of the structure
Provide cost estimate for structural works
1.3 The Client

The client for this project is an architect that works at Monolith Construction and Development Corporation
and BCS Architectural Design and Built, Arch. Beejay Santa Maria. The client also stated that he wants an
economical design and specified to use steel for the structure to shorten the construction duration.
1.4 Project Scope and Limitations

The scope of the project is to provide a (1) detailed and conceptual structural design plans for the client in
accordance to the relevant codes and standards (2) reliable and accurate cost estimates of the structural
works (3) Analyze the structure using STAAD Pro
The following were not covered in the design project (1) detailed computation of building cost estimates of
mechanical, electrical, plumbing, sanitation, architectural, etc. and(2) detailed activities for construction
management.
1.5 Project Development

The design has undertaken numerous phases as shown in Figure 1-2. The project started with the
arrangement and detailing of the plans adhering to the codes and standards, followed by conceptualization
of the whole structure including the columns, beams, wall, and etc. for the purpose of visualization. We first
identified potential savings on the design of the building. The identification of essential constraints such as
economics, constructability, social, political, environmental, safety and ethical can adversely affect our
design decisions. In this phase, the designers have to be able to propose alternatives or tradeoffs on what
design to undertake considering multiple constraints and engineering standards. Evaluation of influence of
multiple constraints, tradeoffs and standards on the final design then followed. In selecting the best system
for the final design, the designers compared the specific constraints variables with appropriate civil
engineering practice standard performance measure like safety against displacement, stresses, and other
collapse patterns.
Figure 1-2 Steps of design project
10
Chapter 2 : Design Inputs

2.1 Description of the structure
The architectural plans used in this design are provided by the clients architect. Details of the structural
plans are presented and discussed in chapters 3 and 4.
Using the architectural plan, the structure frame of the building was created as shown in Figure 2-1.The
condominium is categorized as a standard occupancy structure (occupancy category IV),and is located at
seismic zone 4near the valley fault line 20km away from the site. The condominium has two access stairs
located at every third point of longitudinal section, one facing west and the other facing east. The elevator
at the center of the structure is a two lifter type, constructed with reinforced concrete around that act as
shear wall and should be taken advantage of resisting earthquake forces. The basement is constructed
with retaining walls to resist lateral pressures generated by loose soils and the entire slab is designed as
one way system. The whole frame comprises built-up sections which are connected by double angle
welded at simply supported beams and by bolted flange plate at seismic-resisting frames as stated in the
design trade-offs.
11
Figure 2-3 Framing plan of the 7-storey condominium

Room Classification and Corresponding Area
Table 2-1 describes and locates every rooms and amenities in the condominium as well as their
corresponding areas. With this table, the designers can easily find and distinguish each required loadings
existing on the frames of the structure.
Table 2-1 Room Classification and Corresponding Area
Location
Room
description
Parking slot
Area
(sq.m)
13
Access stair/Fire
exit
Elevator
Ground floor
Room
description
Commercial 1
Area
(sq.m)
39.2
Ground floor
Commercial 2
39.2
Sq.m
Ground floor
Commercial 3
39.2
Sq.m
Ground floor
Commercial 4
39.2
Sq.m
Ground floor
Commercial 5
39.2
Sq.m
Office 1
Office 2
Office 3
Office 4
Office 5
Office 6
Office 7
Access stair/Fire
exit
Elevator
Public Comport
room
Public Comport
29
29
39
39
39
29
29
1
2
6.6
Sq.m
Sq.m
Sq.m
Sq.m
Sq.m
Sq.m
Sq.m
Piece
s
Lifter
Sq.m
8.9
Sq.m
Basement
level
Basement
level
Basement
level
Location
Ground
Ground
Ground
Ground
Ground
Ground
Ground
Ground
floor
floor
floor
floor
floor
floor
floor
floor
Ground floor
Ground floor
Ground floor
12
Unit
Remarks
Slots
2.5m x 5m
Piece
s
Lifter
------Service & Passenger
Unit
Remarks
Sq.m
Leisure, Retail &

care
Leisure, Retail &
care
Leisure, Retail &
care
Leisure, Retail &
care
Leisure, Retail &
care
-------------------------------------------------
Health
Health
Health
Health
Health
Service & Passenger

Female CR
Male CR
room
Location
2nd to 6th
level
2nd to 6th
level
2nd to 6th
level
2nd to 6th
level
2nd to 6th
level
2nd to 6th
level
2nd to 6th
level
2nd to 6th
level
2nd to 6th
level
2nd to 6th
level
2nd to 6th
level
Location
2nd to 6th
level
2nd to 6th
level
Location
Roof deck
Room
description
Access stair/Fire
exit
Elevator
Area
(sq.m)
2
Unit
Remarks
-------
Piece
s
Lifter
Dwelling unit 1
36
Sq.m
Dwelling unit 2
40.2
Sq.m
Dwelling unit 3
38.2
Sq.m
Dwelling unit 4
40.2
Sq.m
Dwelling unit 5
36
Sq.m
Dwelling unit 6
38.2
Sq.m
Dwelling unit 7
36
Sq.m
Dwelling unit 8&

10
Dwelling unit 9
40.2
Sq.m
38.2
Sq.m
Room
description
Dwelling unit 11
Area
(sq.m)
36
Unit
Sq.m
Dwelling unit 12
38.2
Sq.m
Room
description
Open space
Area
(sq.m)
595
Unit
Remarks
Sq.m
Provide space for water

tank
Service & Passenger

2 Bed rooms with
balcony
2 Bed rooms with
balcony
2 Bed rooms with
balcony
2 Bed rooms with
balcony
2 Bed rooms with
balcony
2 Bed rooms with
balcony
2 Bed rooms with
balcony
2 Bed rooms with
balcony
2 Bed rooms with
balcony
Remarks
2 Bed rooms with
balcony
2 Bed rooms with
balcony
Sides and elevation of the 7-Storey Condominium

This will show the front and rear view with elevation, right and left side view and floor plans of basement,
ground floor, 2nd to 6th floor and roof deck of the mixed commercial and residential condominium.
13
Figure 2-4 Front elevation & rear elevation
14
Figure 2-5 Right side and left side elevation

Architectural and Occupancy Plan of the 7-Storey Condominium
This will show the floor plans and their occupancies which content the basement plan, ground floor plan of
commercial use, 2nd to 7th storey floor plan of residential use and roof deck which serve as basis for the
design.
15
Figure 2-6 Basement level for parking lot
16
Figure 2-7 Ground floor plan for commercial use
17
Figure 2-8 2nd to 7th floor plan for residential use
18
Figure 2-9 Roof deck plan
19
Figure 2-10 Occupancy plan for ground floor
20
Figure 2-11 Occupancy plan for 2nd to 7th floor

Framing Plan of the 7-Storey Condominium
This will show the respective position of column and girders in basement plan, ground floor plan for
commercial use and 2nd to 7thstorey floor plan for residential use which serve as basis for the design.
21
Figure 2-12 Framing plan for ground floor
22
Figure 2-13 Framing plan for 2nd to 7th floor
Chapter 3 : Constraints, Trade-offs and Standards

3.1 Design Constraints
There are multiple of possible constraints that can be present in designing a structure. Among these
constraints are as follows that have relevant impact in the design of the 7-storey condominium.
1. Economic (Cost). The design of the building will comprise steel for the structural framing as
specified by the client. The designers are constrained to use this material instead of using
reinforced concrete design or composite design, which we think can be cheaper, and as a
23
result schemed ways for potential savings when using steel materials. Davison and Owens
(2003) noted that frame in the steel building has a greater percentage in the entire budget of
the structural design. Among the components of the steel structure, the frames can consist30%
in the total cost of construction (Davison & Owens, 2003). With savings in mind, the designers
considered rolled and built-up sections for the column and beams for the frames and check
which of these two materials will give lesser cost in the construction of frame.
The designers also explored on savings in the connection design. The designers considered
two types of connection design for seismic resistance framing, gravity load frames and simply
supported beams. For simply supported beams, double angle welded and double angle bolted
under simple connection is used. For seismic resisting and gravity load frames, welded flange
plate and bolted flange plate under moment connection is used. Overall, the designers want to
produce lower cost of construction in both sections and connection of steel frame.
2. Constructability (Duration of connection). The designers thought on the process of erection
of the structural framing considering ease of installing column and beam framing through
connection type. The designers will determine the man-hour of two alternative method of
connection to check where we can save on labor.
3. Environmental (Resistance to seismic effects). Having considered the constructability of
structure either using rolled or built-up sections, it is also reasonable to look at the safety of the
structure. This must be capable to withstand lateral loads such as seismic, wind loads and
gravity loads.
3.2 Trade-offs
As a startup, when coming up with the design trade-offs, the designers wanted something that will satisfy
the economical, constructability and environmental constraints. For material sections, choosing between
rolled and built-up will provide the appropriate sections satisfying the cost and capability to resist lateral
loads. For connections, the designers will select the type of connection that will provide cheaper alternative
but facilitates easy installation.
In the design of steel frame for 7-storey condominium, a trade-off on steel frame section and connection
are considered. A strategy for steel frame might be to select the performance of rolled and built-up sections
for column and beam members of steel frame, the connection for simply supported beams using double
angle welded and double angle bolted under simple connection and welded flange plate and bolted flange
plate under moment connection for seismic-resisting frames. These trade-off materials are designed in
accordance with the design constraints such as economic, constructability and environmental (safety).The
design choice will be adopted for the entire column and beam members of the steel frame. The details
about the trade-off materials are discussed in chapter 4.
24
Using the model on trade-off strategies in engineering design (Otto & Antonson, 1991), the importance of
each criterion (on scale of 0 to 5, 5 with the highest importance) was assigned and each design
methodologys ability to satisfy the criterion (on a scale from -5 to 5, 5 with the highest ability to satisfy the
criterion) was likewise tabulated. The designers computed the ability to satisfy the criterion using this
procedure.
Computation of ranking for ability to satisfy criterion of materials:
(Higher Value Lower Value)
% difference = (Higher Value)
Eq. 3.1
Subordinate Rank = Governing Rank (% difference) x 10
Eq. 3.2
The governing rank is the subjective choice of the designer. In assigning the value for the criterions
importance and the ability to satisfy the criterion, the designers would subjectively choose any desired
value. This subjective value depends on the initial estimate, say for economic criterion, which the designer
can initially select. The subordinate rank in Eq. 3.2 is a variable that corresponds to its percentage distance
from the governing rank along the ranking scale.
As shown in Figure 3.1 the distance is determined by multiplying the percentage difference by the number
of scale that is 10. The product will be the number of stride/interval from the governing value.
Figure 3-14 Ranking scale for percent difference

After considering the design constraints, the designers came up with the initial rankings on the section to be
used and the connection joining them. The discussion on how the designers came up with the raw rankings
values are shown and computed below.
Table 3-2Designer Raw Rankings for Sections

Ability to Satisfy the Criterion
(scale from -5 to 5)
Rolled Steel Sections Built-up Steel Sections
Decision Criteria for

Sections
Criterion's
Importance
(scale of 0 to 5)
1. Economic (Cost)
2. Manufacturability
25
(Fabrication Duration)
Total =
30
28
*Reference: Otto, K. N. and Antonsson, E. K., (1991). Trade-off strategies in engineering design. Research in Engineering Design, volume 3, number 2,
pages 87-104.Retrieved from http://www.design.caltech.edu/Research/Publications/90e.pdf on March 11, 2013
The designers initial ranking for sections, the economic criterion importance is ranked as five (5) because
the client specified that the budget must be minimal and enough for its area. Manufacturability constraints
ranked as three (3) because the designers fabricate their own built-up sections. On the other hand,
fabrication of sections will not affect the duration of construction. The environmental criterion was not
ranked because we do not have data yet to evaluate its importance.
The discussions on the choice of the governing and subjective ranking on the ability to satisfy the criterion
are as follows:
Economic (Cost).Built-up sections obtained higher ranking since the designers assumed that built-up
members can be fabricated to the exact size needed to meet the loading in each part of
the structure. By comparison, with rolled sections, designers select appropriate size for
the section that will meet the critical load, so they have to be heavier overall. Therefore,
the lesser the weight of the sections, the lesser the cost will be.
Manufacturability (Fabrication Duration).Based on fabrication of sections, rolled sections got higher ranking
than the built-up sections because it is ready for use.
Initial Cost Estimate for Sections (Rolled and Built-up)

Tables 3-2 and 3-3 listed below are the total cost estimates and fabrication of sections which show the
difference between rolled and built-up. The rankings for ability of materials to satisfy the criteria are also
computed after the table using the model on trade-off strategies in engineering design by Otto and
Antonsson (1991). Detailed computation is attached in the Appendix B.
Table 3-3Initial Cost Estimate for Sections (Rolled and Built-up)

Type of Materials
Total
Rolled Section
Php14,474,670
Built-up Section
Php10,962,180
Computation of Ranking for Economic (cost):
26

% difference = ( Higher Value)
difference=
Where:
14,474,67010,962,180
x 10=2.42 say 2
14,474,670
Loosing Rank=52=3
The distance is determined by multiplying the percentage difference by the number of scale that is 10. The
product will be the number of stride/interval from the governing value.
Table 3-4 Initial Duration of Construction for Sections (Built-up)

Type of Materials
Rolled Section
Built-up Section
Duration
1654 Man-hour
2923 Man-hour
Computation of Ranking for Constructability (Fabrication):

Where:
difference=
29231654
x 10=4.36 say 4
2923
Loosing Rank=54=1
.
Table 3-5 Designer Raw Rankings for Simple Connections
Criterion's
27
Double Angle Bolted
Double Angle Welded
Simple Connections
Importance
(scale of 0 to 5)
1. Economic (Cost)
2. Constructability
(Construction Duration)
-1
35
22
Total =
In initial designers ranking for simple shear connections, economic ranked as five (5) in the criterions
importance since installation of connection will provide more expenses in erection of frame. Constructability
ranked as three (3) because the duration of erection for frame construction are based on the installation
process of connections.
Economic (Cost).Double angle Welded got higher ranking because the materials used for this connections
are cheaper than the cost of bolts used for double angle bolted connections. However,
welded produced higher cost in labor than bolted connections that is why the rankings
are almost equal.
Constructability (Construction Duration).Bolted connections design obtained higher ranking because
comparatively, it offers ease of construction and facilitates speed because of more
automated materials for installation.
Initial Cost Estimate for Simple Connections (Double Angle Welded and Double Angle Bolted)
Tables 3-5 and 3-6 listed below are the total cost estimates and installation of connections which show the
difference between Double Angle Welded (DAW) and Double Angle Bolted (DAB). The rankings for ability of
materials to satisfy the criterions are also computed after the table using the model on trade-off strategies
in engineering design by Otto and Antonsson (1991). Detailed computation is attached in the Appendix B.
Table 3-6 Initial Cost Estimate for Simple Connections (DAB and DAW)
Type of connection
D.A
connection
D.A
connection
Welded
Bolted
Material cost
Constructability
(man-hour)
Php116460.8
794 man-hr
Php164579
372 man-hr
28
Total Cost
Php 166,061.00
Php 180,854.00

Where:
difference=
180,854166,061
x 10=0.82 say 1
180,854
Loosing Rank=51=4
Table 3-7 Initial Duration of Construction for Simple Connection (DAB and DAW)
Type of Materials
Double Angle
Welded
Double Angle
Bolted
Duration
794 Man-hour
372 Man-hour
Computation of Ranking for Constructability:

Where:
difference=
794372
x 10=5.3
794
Loosing Rank=55.3=0.31 say 1

29
Table 3-8 Designer Raw Rankings for Moment Connections

Bolted Flange Plate
Welded Flange Plate

Moment Connections
Criterion's
Importance
(scale of 0 to 5)
1. Economic (Cost)
2. Constructability
-2
35
19
Total =
In initial designers ranking for moment connections, economic ranked as five (5) in the criterions
importance since the clients specified to optimize the budget while it will provide more expenses in
installation. Constructability ranked as three (3) because the duration of erection for frame construction are
based on the installation process of connections.
Economic (Cost).Double angle Welded got higher ranking because the materials used for this connections
are cheaper than the cost of bolts used for double angle bolted connections. However,
welded produced higher cost in labor than bolted connections that is why the rankings
are almost equal.
Constructability (Construction Duration).Bolted connections design obtained higher ranking because
comparatively, it offers ease of construction and facilitates speed because of more
Initial Cost Estimate for Moment Connections (Welded Flange Plate and Bolted Flange Plate)
Table 3.8 and 3.9 listed below are the total cost estimates and installation of connections which show the
difference between Welded Flange Plate (WFP) and Bolted Flange Plate (BFP). The rankings for ability of
materials to satisfy the criterions are also computed after the table using the model on trade-off strategies
in engineering design by Otto and Antonsson (1991).Detailed computation is attached in the Appendix B.
Table 3-9 Initial Cost Estimate for Moment Connection (BFP and WFP)
Type of connection
Material cost
Welded Flange Plate
Php 71,754.88
Constructability
(man-hour)
397 man-hour
30
Total Cost
Php 96,584.88
Bolted Flange Plate
Php 101,401.9
229 man-hour
Php 111,429.4

Where:
difference=
111,429.496,584.88
x 10=1.33 say 1
111,429.4
Loosing Rank=51=4
Table 3-10 Initial Duration of Construction for Moment Connection (BFP and WFP)
Type of Materials
Welded Flange
Plate
Bolted Flange
Plate
Duration
917 Man-hour
229 Man-hour

31
Where:
difference=
917229
x 10=7.50 say 8
917
Loosing Rank=58=3
The discussions below explain how the designers came up with their criteria about the ability of the
construction method in the aspect of structural frame used.
1. Economic (Cost).The designers ranking are computed based on the trade-off strategies on the
engineering design (Otto & Antonson, 1921). The rankings considered that the built-up sections are
more economical since the designers can fabricate members to the exact size needed to meet the
loading in each part of the structure. By comparison, with rolled sections, designers size their
sections to meet their critical load, so they have to be heavier overall. Therefore, the lesser the
weight of the sections, the lesser the cost will be.
In terms of ranking connections, bolted connections requires nuts, washers and bolts that maybe a
little expensive than welding rods and this connection will not normally as strong as welded
because of reduction of area caused by drilling the holes. In terms of installation, welded
connection requires skilled welder that may cost high labor cost. These materials and labor costs
are considered in ranking of designers for both simple and moment connections.
2. Constructability (Duration of Construction). The designers ranking are based on construction
methodology. What are more important in this part are the connections that link each member of
the structure. For both simple and moment connections, bolted connections design obtained higher
rating because comparatively, it offers ease of construction and facilitates speed because of more
Ultimately, the cost factor is the most essential consideration in the design of sections and both
simple and moment connections.
3.3 Design Standards

The design standards used are taken from the following codes and standards:
1
National Structural Code of the Philippines (NSCP) vol. 1-2010 edition (PD1096)
32
2
3
4
5
National Building Code of the Philippines

ASTM (American Society for Testing and Materials)
ASEP Steel Handbook 2004 vol. 1
Steel Designers Manual of the Steel Construction Institute 6 th Edition
1. The National Structural Code of the Philippines 2010.This structural code provides minimum
requirements for building structural systems using prescriptive and performance-based provisions. It is
founded on broad-based principles that make possible the use of new materials and new building
designs. It is also designed to meet these needs through various model codes/regulations, to
safeguard the public health and safety nationwide. This is the main reference for the design procedure
of the structure.
Material Strength. Materials conforming specifications of NSCP 6th edition 2010 were used in the
design of the project.
Loadings.Dead loads, live loads and environmental loads (wind and earthquake) are the forces
acting on the structure. Dead loads are consists of the weight of all materials of construction and
partition loads that are presented in the next chapter. Live loads shall be the maximum loads
expected by the occupancy; these loads are attached in chapter 4 as well. The required lateral
loads due to wind and earthquake forces shall be separately calculated.
Wind Loads.The wind load is calculated in STAAD Pro using specifications adopted in American
Society of Civil Engineers ASCE7-05 and based on procedure as stated in NSCP 2010, section
207.
Seismic Loads.The structure shall be designed and constructed to resist the effect of seismic
ground motion as provided in section 208 of NSCP 6 th edition (2010).
Load Combinations. Steel sections shall be designed using the Allowable Stress Design method
using the following combination
:
:
:
:
DL + LL
DL + 0.75 LL
DL + WL
DL + 0.7 EL
:
:
:
33
DL + 0.75 WL + 0.75 LL
0.6 DL + WL
0.6 DL + 0.7 EL
Deformation Limits. Structures or structural members shall be checked such that the maximum
deformation does not exceed the following:
a. Beams and Girders. Beams and girders supporting floors and roof shall be proportioned with due
regard to the deflection produced by the design loads. Considering then the total deflection, which
is due to the additional live loads, occurring after attachment of non-structural elements shall not
exceed L/360.
2. The National Building Code of the Philippines (PD 1096).The National Building Code of the
Philippines, also known as Presidential Decree No. 1096 was formulated and adopted as a uniform
building code to embody up-to-date and modern technical knowledge on building design, construction,
use, occupancy and maintenance. The Code provides for all buildings and structures, a framework of
minimum standards and requirements to regulate and control location, site, design, and quality of
materials, construction, use, occupancy, and maintenance.
A. Loading
B. Steel
:
:
UBC 97, ASCE 7-05

A36
3. Association of Structural Engineers of the Philippines (ASEP) Steel Handbook, 3 rd Edition,

Volume 1. This provide the civil and structural engineering practitioners with a handy reference to
locally available rolled shapes, built-up shapes, cold-formed steel sections and light gage steel
sections.
a. Hot-rolled Sections Dimensions and Properties
b. Built-up Sections Dimensions and Properties
Chapter 4 : Design of Structure

4.1 Methodology
The structure is designed according to the various codes, standards and the clients budget. The frame of
the structure is designed as steel using allowable stress design (ASD) method as well as the shielded
metal arc welding process (SMAW) for the connections. The composite slab steel decking is designed as
one way using working stress design (WSD) method. All parts of the steel building are designed in
accordance with the National Structural Codes of the Philippines. Corresponding codes and standards that
were used in the design process are specified in chapter 3 of the report and in Appendix C.
4.2 Structural Design

A flowchart in Figure 4.1 is created and followed as a process of activities for the designers. The design
starts with conceptualization of model using STAAD Pro V8i then information of the structure which
contents the framing, connections, slabs, supports, basement, and elevator specifications. Next is the final
decision of the designers for the structure regarding the presented trade-offs, followed by loadings
considering dead loads, live loads, seismic loads and wind loads. After physical modeling, the structure was
analyzed and then finally the design of the entire structure.
4.2.1 Design of structure using Rolled

FigureSections
4-15 Flowchart of structural design
In this section, the designers will present its design of the structure when the framing system used rolled
section as material. As shown in Figure 4.2, the columns and beams of the steel frame is constructed with
rolled sections and designed as dual system combining special moment-resisting frame and shear wall.
The elevator shaft at the center of the structure is considered as shear wall. Intermediate beams are
provided to effect one-way slab design for the flooring system.
Figure 4-16 Structural frame for Rolled Section
In accordance to section 208.4 of NSCP 6 th Edition (2010), the structural system that we used is classified
as dual system because of the integration of moment frames and shear wall. Resistance to lateral load is
provided by shear wall and moment-resisting frames shall be designed to independently resist at least 25
percent of the design base shear. The 75% of base shear shall be resisted by the shear wall.
4.2.1.1 Column-Beam Framing Plans of the Structure using Rolled Sections

The locations of the columns in the basement through the roof deck were the same except at grids A and H
where it is terminated at ground to 7 th Floor. The parameters that we followed in planning for the framing
constitute the space design of the architect, economical span to depth ratio for the columns and beams and
overall ease of traffic flow at the basement. We also considered the position of the gravity and lateral force
resisting framing system as shown Figure 4-3 4-4. It also indicated the labels for the columns, beams and
slab elements.
Figure 4-17 Orientation of girders, beams and columns for ground floor
Figure 4-18
Orientation of girders, beams and columns for 2nd to 7th floor
4.2.1.1.1 Column-Beam
Connections
For column-beam connection we considered two types of connection design for seismic resistance framing
and gravity framing system. For gravity framing system, simply supported beams, double angle welded and
double angle bolted under simple connection is used. For seismic resisting and gravity load frames, welded
flange plate and bolted flange plate under moment connection is used.
Figure 4-5 shows the highlighted members in red assigned as seismic-resisting frame of the structure. The
seismic-resisting frame acted as support and resistance to lateral loads. The designers assumed the
column-beam members intersections on this frame to be fixed at both ends.
Figure 4-19 Seismic-resisting frame of the structure
Figure 4-6 shows the location for gravity load frame of the steel building. The gravity load frames provided
resistance to all vertical loads and assumed pinned at both ends. In this case, the degrees of freedom were
restricted to rotational displacement for moment Z.
4.2.1.2 Floor Framing Plan of Structure using Rolled Section

Figure 4-20 Gravity load frame of the structure
The appropriate floor system for our framing plan is one-way because of our provisions of intermediate
beams where the ratio of the long panel dimension to short dimension is 0.38 which is less than 0.5. In oneway floor system, we may be able to improve constructability since the concentration of the reinforcing bars
will be on one direction only. Floor framing plan is shown in section 4.2.1.1 Figure 4-3 4-4.
4.2.1.3 Structure Supports
In planning for the foundation of the structure, we provided two design options for footings. Isolated footings
were implemented for entire columns except for those at gridlines A and H along gridlines 1 to 4 which were
designed as combined footings because they are close together and may cause overlap of adjacent
isolated footing. Locations of footings are shown in Figure 4-7.
4.2.1.4 Material Properties of Rolled Sections

Materials conforming with specificationsFigure
of NSCP
6 thFoundation
Edition (2010)
4-21
planwere used in the design of the structure
using rolled sections. The properties for rolled sections were based on rolled section of Association of
Structural Engineers of the Philippines, Inc. (2004).Steel Handbook, Dimensions and Properties.
Philippines. ASEP. Locally produced rolled shapes were applicable only for structural steel whose minimum
yield stress is 230 MPa. In this structure, the designers used A36 for rolled sections with minimum yield
stress of 248 MPa and tensile strength of 400-551 MPa.
For connections, the use of A325 bolts was considered conforming to ASTM specifications under section
501.3.4 of NSCP 6th edition (2010). This bolt was used for the entire joining members of the steel structure.
4.2.1.5 Loadings of the Structure using Rolled Sections
The design loadings for a steel structure were specified in codes. The designers used two types of codes to
indicate the loads that act on the structure. National Building Codes of the Philippines specified the
minimum design loads and standards for construction and the National Structural Code of the Philippines
provided the detailed standards and loads for actual design.
4.2.1.5.1 Primary Loadings
Dead Loads
Corresponding loads of the following materials listed below were based on section 204 of NSCP 6 th edition
(2010). The actual weights of materials are applied in determining dead loads; minimum values per floor
are permitted in Tables 4-1.
1. Masonry concrete (Solid portion) = 23.6 kPa
2. Steel decking 18 gage = 0.14 kPa
3. Ceramic of Quarry tile (20mm) on 25 mm mortar bed = 1.53 kPa
4. Concrete masonry units
A. Exterior wall Concrete masonry, 150 mm width thickness (Including plaster w/ an
additional of 0.24 kPa on both sides) = 3.32 kPa
B. Interior wall Concrete masonry, 100 mm width thickness (Including plaster w/ an
5. Wall partition loads based on section 204.3 of NSCP 6 th edition (2010) where office buildings and
other buildings where partition location are subject to change shall e designed to support, in
addition to all other loads, a uniformly distributed dead load = 1 kPa of floor area
6. Ceiling system
A. Suspended metal lath and gypsum board =0.48 kPa
B. Mechanical duct allowance = 0.20 kPa
Table 4-11 Uniform Loads on Slab Produce by Gravity Loads in kPa
Ground floor
Floor level
Basement level
Occupancy
Category
Description
Parking
Parking
Lobbies and
office
Corridor
office
Office use
commercial
Storage whole
Dead load(kPa)
12.0
5.3
5.3
5.3
2nd to 7th
commercial
Office and
commercial
Residential
Residential
Residential
Residential
sale
General storage
6.3
Exit Facilities
5.3
Basic Floor area

Corridor
Restrooms
storage
6.3
5.3
6.3
6.3
Roof deck
Live Loads
Table 4-2 below shows the summarized loadings for types of occupancy to be considered in the design of
live load which is based on section 205.3.1 table 205.1 of NSCP 6 th edition (2010) for the Minimum uniform
floor live load.
Table 4-12 Occupancy Live Loads
Floor level
Basement level
Ground floor
2nd to 7th
Ground floor
Roof deck
Occupancy
Live load(kPa)
Category
Description
1.9
Lobbies and
office
4.8
Corridor
office
Office use
2.4
Storage whole
commercial
6.0
sale
commercial
General storage
4.8
Office and
Exit Facilities
4.8
commercial
Residential
Basic Floor area
1.9
Residential
Corridor
3.8
Residential
Restrooms
1.9
Residential
storage
1.9
Same as area served of occupancy
4.2.1.5.2 Load Combinations

This load modeling of the structure depends on the loadings specifications and parameters stated above.
This section shows all the parameters used to help the designers analyze the structure using STAAD
Table 4-13 Load Combination used in STAAD Pro V8i
Case Load No.
8
Description
DL + LL
Parameters
Combination for ASD from NSCP
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
DL + 0.75 LL
DL + WL
DL + 0.7 EL
DL + 0.7 EL
DL + 0.75 WL + 0.75 LL
DL + 0.525 EL + 0.75 LL
DL + 0.525 EL + 0.75 LL
0.6 DL + WL
0.6 DL + 0.7 EL
0.6 DL + 0.7 EL

4.2.1.5.3 Earthquake Loads

Parameters for seismic analysis stated below are based on section 208 of NSCP 6 th edition (2010). These
earthquake provisions herein are primarily to safeguard against major structural failures and human
casualty, and to limit damages or maintain function.
1. Earthquake force resisting system: Dual system for both X and Z axis of frames.
2. Seismic zone: Zone 4 (Where the structure is located in NCR region)
3. Seismic Source Type A as influenced by valley fault system
4. Soil profile type: Sc (foundations on sedimentary rock)

Having Near-Source Factor of Na = 1.2 and Nv = 1.6
5. Seismic source: 10 km (The structure is 20 km away from the nearest fault line which is the
valley fault)
These specifications are shown in Table 4-4 and also specified in geotechnical investigation report
conducted by LPR Soil Boring and Well Drilling Services.
Table 4-14 Tabulated Seismic Parameters
Parameters
Zone
Importance Factor (I)
Rw in X Direction (RWx)
Rw in Z Direction (RWz)
Soil Profile Type (STYP)
Near Source Factor (Na)
:
:
:
:
:
:
Value
0.4
1
5.5
5.5
3
1.2
Near Source Factor (Nv)
1.6
4.2.1.5.4 Wind Loads

The structure shall be designed and constructed to resist wind load. The designed wind load, determined
using STAAD Pro shall not be less than specified in section 207 of NSCP 6 th edition (2010).
1. Frame system for wind load resistance: Components and cladding
2. Zone classification: Zone 2 (with corresponding wind speed of 200 km/h by means of its location
as stated in the previous chapter)
3. Exposure category: Surface roughness B (Where the structure is located in a suburban area)
4. Occupancy category: standard occupancy
5. Enclosure classification: Partially enclosed building (NSCP section 207.2)
Table 4-15 Wind Load Parameters
Parameters
Building Classification Category
Basic Wind Speed
Exposure Category
Structure Type
:
:
:
:
Value
Category IV
200 km/h
Exposure B
Building Structure
4.2.1.6 Structural Analysis of Structure using Rolled Sections

After framing planning and preparing important data for the analysis of the structure, we will now model the
structure using STAAD Pro.
There were several steps in modeling the structure using STAAD pro. First, we entered the column-beam
framing plan using graphical user interface (GUI). For moment resisting frames we assumed all
connections as fixed and gravity load frames were assumed to have certain rotational degrees of freedom
along the global Z coordinates. Next, we provided the model with material properties. We used the section
for rolled section provided in the program. These rolled sections were also similar to our ASEP Steel
Handbook (2004).
In modeling the slab we used four node plate elements and surface element for elevator shaft and
basement wall.
In modeling the loads we defined first the lateral loads composed of wind and seismic parameters. For the
wind load we entered the parameters as describe in section 4.2.1.5.4. We automated the wind load using
ASCE 7 (2010) for the wind intensities. We also inputted the seismic parameters as described in section
4.2.1.5.3. Then, we entered primary and load combinations.
The supports for the structure were all assumed the column bases to be pinned, that are, not transmitting
any bending moments to the foundation.
Shown in Figure 4-8 is the completed model in STAAD Pro.
4.2.1.6.1 Result of Structural Analysis

The designers selected one critical section for each framing along longitudinal and transverse dimension of
Figure 4-22 Completed model of steel frame using STAAD Pro
the structure in the analysis and design. Frame along gridline 4 is critical for seismic analysis and its
maximum moment is 1178 kN-m for column at basement and 918 kN-m for beam at ground floor as shown
in Figure 4-9. Table 4-6 shows the maximum moments per floor along the critical frame.
Figure 4-23 Critical frame for seismic analysis

Table 4-16 Maximum Moments at Gridline 4
Maximum Moment
Maximum Shear
Loadings
Loadings
(kN-m)
(kN)
1. EQ.X
1. EQ.X
918
359
Ground Floor
1. EQ.X
1. EQ.X
738
228
2nd to 7th Floor
1.
EQ.X
8.
DL + LL
46.2
40.2
Roof Deck
Designation
Loadings Maximum Axial
Loadings
Maximum Moment
1.
EQ.X
12.
DL + 0.7 EL
1178
1982
Basement
1. EQ.X
15. DL + .525 EL + .75 LL
721
2035
Ground Floor
1. EQ.X
15. DL + .525 EL + .75 LL
529
1697
2nd to 3rd Floor
1. EQ.X
8. DL + LL
350
1071
4th to 5th Floor
1. EQ.X
8. DL + LL
130
491
6th to 7th Floor
Table 4-6 shown are maximum moments for the critical frame. These results from the STAAD are used for
the sample design of columns and girders.
COLUMNS
BEAMS
Designation
As shown in Figure 4-10 horizontal displacements or drifts of the critical frame are computed, these results
must not exceed the allowable drift as required by section 208.5.9 of the NSCP 6 th edition (2010). From the
result of STAAD Pro v8i, the maximum horizontal drift of the structure (41 mm) does not exceed the
allowable drift of 75 mm.
Figure 4-24 Displacement of the critical frame

As shown in Figure 4-11, the loadings acted on the frame transmitted moments that produced bending on
each member. The bending stress produced by these loadings must not exceed the computed allowable
bending stress.
4.2.1.7 Design of Structural Members using Rolled Sections

After the analysis of the frame using
rolled
sections, the
designers
are now
Figure
4-25Bending
stress
for critical
frameable to design the members of
frame such as columns, beams and connections. The design processes for members are discussed in
subsequent sections.
4.2.1.7.1 Design of Beams (Rolled Sections)
The result of the analysis showed maximum moment of 918 kN-m for beam members along gridline 4 at
ground floor level as shown in Table 4.6. This maximum moment will be implemented for the design of all
beams along gridline 1 and 4 on the ground level because the loadings in these gridlines were the same.
The designers oriented the beams based on their loadings to attain economical of the rolled sections.
The design of the beams were assumed to be fixed at both ends since it was included in moment-resisting
frames while the beams for gravity load frames were assumed to be pin supported.
In the selection of rolled sections for the design of beams, the designers considered the dimension and
internal aspect such as weight and depth of the section. In this way, we were able to select rolled sections
which were economical as well as optimizing space.
In the design of beams sections, we initially assumed the beams as non-compact. This assumption gives
allowance or factor of safety than the other possible compactness of section. From this assumption, the
designers computed the section modulus that serves as basis in the selection of appropriate section for the
final design. This section is to be selected from rolled shapes section as provided in ASEP Steel Handbook.
The designers must select at least equal or greater than from the initial computed value and check its
adequacy from all possible failures of the section. This involves shear, bending and deflection failures as
discussed below.
Considering the maximum moment of 918 kN-m acting on the critical beam member from moment resisting
frame, initial section modulus is to be computed using this equation:
Sx =
Actual moment max . 918 x 103

=
=6169.35 x 10 3 mm3
0.60 F y
0.60 x 248
With the computed section modulus, the designers may now select trial sections from the ASEP steel
handbook for the final design as Listed in Table 4-7.
Table 4-17 Trial Sections for Design of Beam
Section
W 24 x 162
W 18 x 211
W12 x 279
Section modulus
Beam depth ( d )
6784 x 103 mm3
6886 x 103 mm3
6440 x 103 mm3
635 mm
525.02 mm
402.59 mm
Web thickness
(t w )
17.92 mm
26.92 mm
38.86 mm
Section
W 24 x 162
W 18 x 211
W12 x 279
b
Flange base ( f )
329.06 mm
293.50 mm
333.76 mm
Flange thickness
(t f )
30.99 mm
48.51 mm
62.74 mm
Weight of beam (w)
241 mm
314 mm
415 mm
From the selected sections, the designers chose to design the lightest section which is W12 X 279 to
provide lesser cost for the steel material.
Table 4-18 Classification of W12 X 279 Rolled Section
Stiffen element
b f /2t f
2.659
Un-stiffen element
d /t w
10.36
170/
F y
10.79
Remarks
1680/
Compact
F y
Remarks
106.68
Compact
Since the section is compact, therefore the allowable bending stress is equal to 0.66
Fy
= Fb. The
actual bending stress must not exceed the allowable bending stress; the stress can be computed using
formula:
For Bending Stress of Beams:
fb=
Where:
M
< Fb
Sx
Equation 4.2.1.2
fb
= actual bending stress, MPa
= bending moment of section, N.mm
= moment of inertia due to neutral axis, mm 4
= distance from neutral axis to the extreme fiber, mm

I
C
Fb
= is known as the section modulus, mm3

= allowable bending stress, MPa
For compact sections bending about strong and weak axes

Fb=0.66 Fy
(Strong axis)
Fb=0.75 Fy
(Weak axis)
Equation 4.2.1.3
Equation 4.2.1.4
A compact section must satisfy the following conditions:

bf 170
2 tf Fy
Equation 4.2.1.5
d 1680
tw Fy
And when
Equation 4.2.1.6
Lb < Lc
Where:
Lc
is the smaller value and
L1 =
200bf
Fy
L1 =
Lu
is the larger of
L1
and
L2
Equation 4.2.1.7
137900
Fy d
bf tf
Equation 4.2.1.8
For partially compact sections bending about strong and weak axes
Fb=Fy 0.790.000762
Fb=Fy 1.0750.0019
bf
Fy
2 tf
bf
Fy
2 tf
Equation 4.2.1.9
Equation 4.2.1.10
A partially compact section must satisfy the following condition:

170 bf 250
<
<
Fy 2 tf Fy
And when
Lb > Lc
but
Equation 4.2.1.11
Lb < Lu
For non-compact sections bending about strong and weak axes

When
Check whether :
Lb > Lc
but
Lb > Lu
703270 Cb L
3516330Cb
< <
Fy
rt
Fy
Equation 4.2.1.12
Use bigger value of Fbfrom (a) or (b) but < 0.60 Fy
(a)
(b)
L/ rt 2
Fy
2
3
Fb =F y
Fb =
Equation 4.2.1.13
82740Cb
Ld
bf tf
Equation 4.2.1.14
703270 Cb L
3516330Cb
< >
Fy
rt
Fy
Use bigger value of Fbfrom (a) or (b) but < 0.60 Fy
(a)
(b)
Where:
L/rt 2
1172100 Cb
Fb =
Fb =
Equation 4.2.1.15
82740Cb
Ld
bf tf
Equation 4.2.1.16
M1
M1 2
Cb=1.75+1.05
+0.3
< 2.3
M2
M2
( )
M1
= smaller bending moment at the ends of the un-braced length

taken about the strong axis of beam
M2
= larger bending moment at the ends of the un-braced length

taken about the strong axis of beam
M1
M2
= ratio of end moments
M1
M2
= is positive when they have the same sign (reverse curvature)
M1
M2
= is negative when they are of opposite signs (single curvature)
Note: Since the beam section is compact, the actual bending stress is equal to 142.55 MPa which is less
than the allowable bending stress of 163.68 MPa. Therefore, W 12 X 279 rolled section is SAFE for
bending stress.
For Shearing Stress of Beams:

The allowable shearing stress occurs in cross-sectional area of the beam:
When
h 998
tw Fy
F v =0.40 F y
Equation 4.2.1.17
Equation
4.2.1.18
But if
h 998
>
tw Fy
F v=
Fy Cv
0.40 F y
2.89
Equation 4.2.1.19
Equation 4.2.1.20
Where:
h/tw 2
Fy
310264 Kv
C v=
C v=
500
h/tw
K v =4.00+
a
K v =5.34 +
Kv
Fy
5.34
4.00
When
C v < 0.80
When
C v > 0.80
When
a/ h< 1.0
When
a/ h> 1.0
Note: based on Eq. 4.2.1.17, 7.13 < 63.37, the allowable shearing stress is 0.40 Fy = Fv or equal to
99.2 MPa while the actual shearing stress is
V
d (tw)
or equal to 22.95 MPa. Therefore, W12 X
279 rolled section is SAFE for shearing stress.

For Deflection of Beams:
Maximum deflections of steel beams due to vertical loads can be computed using formula below, but the
computed deflection must not exceed
L
360 of span. For the design of the beams, two types of load
occurred.
For uniformly loaded beams which are simply supported at both ends, the maximum deflection can be
computed using formula.
4
5W L
=
384 EI
Equation 4.2.1.21
And for two concentrated load acting on fixed end beams, the maximum deflection is computed using.
5P L
648 EI
Equation 4.2.1.22
Detailed computation of each beam on the frame is attached in Appendix D .

4.2.1.7.2 Design of Columns (Rolled sections)
The result of the analysis showed maximum moment of 1178 kN-m with axial load of 1982 kN for column
members along gridline 4 at basement level. This maximum moment and axial load will be implemented for
the design of all columns on the basement level. The designers oriented the columns per two floors except
for basement and ground level which was oriented per floor. With this, we can obtain economical and
appropriate columns.
In the design of columns at basement, the column bases were assumed to be pinned, that are, not
transmitting any bending moments to the foundation or it is free to rotate but translation fixed. For ground to
succeeding floors, all columns were assumed to be rotation and translation fixed at both ends.
In the selection of rolled sections for the design of columns, the designers considered the dimension and
internal aspect such as weight and depth of the section. In this way, we were able to select rolled sections
Columns occurred in the design were subjected to axial compression and bending stresses. Most of the
columns that has larger axial load than the moment were considered by the designers since it is more
critical and it produced larger dimension in the final design. Detailed computations of columns are attached
in Appendix E.
At first, the designers classified the columns according to slenderness ratio to determine its allowable
compressive stress using these equations.
When:
KL
< Cc
r
KL /r 2
Fy
F .S.
1
F a=
(Intermediate Column)
Equation 4.2.1.23
KL /r
5 3( KL/r)
F . S .= +
3
8C c
Equation 4.2.1.24
2 2 E
Fy
Where:
C c=
When:
KL
> Cc
r
(Long Column)
KL /r 2
23
12 2 E
Fa =
Cc
Where:
Equation 4.2.1.25
= slenderness ratio which defines the limit between intermediate column
and long column.

E
= modulus of elasticity of steel (200 GPa)
Fy
= yield stress of steel
= effective length factor
Fa
= allowable compressive stress
Axial Compression and Bending

The members are then subjected to both axial and bending stress acting simultaneously.
f=
4.2.1.26
P MC
A
I
(Bending in one axis only)
Equation
f=
P M x Cx M y C y
A
Ix
Iy
= stress
(Bending in both axis)
Equation
4.2.1.27
Where:
P = allowable concentrated or axial load, Kn

A = cross sectional area, mm2
C = distance from the neutral axis to the extreme fiber, mm
I = moment of inertia due to neutral axis, mm 4
Axial Compression with Bending
Members subjected to both axial compression and bending stresses shall be proportioned to satisfy the
following requirements:
fa
+
Fa
C mx fb x
Cmy fb y
+
1.0
fa
fa
(1 ' ) Fbx ( 1 ' )Fb y
F ey
F ex
Equation
4.2.1.28
When
fa
f
f
+ bx + by 1.0
0.60 F y Fbx F by
Equation 4.2.1.29
fa
0.15
Fa
Equation 4.2.1.30
f a f bx f by
+
+
1.0
F a Fb x F by
Equation
4.2.1.31
Where :
P
A
fa
= computed axial stress,
fb
= computed compressive bending stress
Fa =
Fa
= axial compressive stress that would permitted if axial force alone existed
Fb
= compressive bending stress that would be permitted if bending moment
alone existed
K l/r 2
23
12 E
F ' e=
Lb
=un-braced length in plane of bending
rb
= radius of gyration in the plane of bending
K = effective length factor in plane of bending

Cm
= Coefficient whose value shall be taken as follows:

a. For compression members in frame subjected to joint translation (side sway),
Cm
= 0.85
b. For rotationally restrained compression members in frames braced against joints

translation and not subjected to transverse loading between their supports in the plane
of bending,
Cm
Where
M2
= 0.6 - 0.4 ( M 1 /
M 1 /M 2
= is the ratio of the smaller to larger moments at the ends of the
proportion of the members un-braced in the plane of bending under

consideration.
c. For compression members in frames braced against joint translation in the plane of
loading and subjected to transverse loading between their supports.
1. For members whose ends are restrained against rotation in the plane of
Cm
bending.
= 0.85
2. For members whose ends are unrestrained against rotation in the plane of
Cm
bending.
= 1.0
Connections
Connections are elements used for joining different members of a structural steel frame. Any steel structure
is an assemblage of different members such as beams and columns which are connected to one another,
usually at the members end.
Connections are mainly composed of any or in combination of components such as bolts (shop or site),
weld (shop or site), connecting plates or connecting angles. Connections are basically classified as:
According to type of connecting medium used (riveted, bolted, welded, etc.)

According to type of internal forces the connections are expected to transmit (shear or moment)
According to type of structural elements that made up the connections (top and seated angle, etc.)
According to type of members the connections are joining (beam-beam, column-beam, etc.)
With this, the designers classified the connection to be used in the structural steel frame as shown in Figure
4-12.
Figure 4-26 Designers classification for connections
Primarily, according to the internal forces that the connections need to transmit, the designers came up with
the use of simple (shear) and moment (rigid) connections. Simple connections are applied for all
intermediate beams and gravity load frames while moment connections are implemented for seismicresisting frames.
For simple (shear) connections and moment (rigid) connections, the designers typically provided two
options for both connections: For simple connection, double angle welded (DAW) indicated in Figure 4-13
and double angle bolted (DAB) shown in Figure 4-14 were compared as connection to be used for all
intermediate beam and gravity load frames. For moment connections, welded flange plate (WFP) indicated
in Figure 4-22 and bolted flange plate shown in Figure 4-21 were also distinguished as connection for
seismic-resisting frames.
4.2.1.7.3 Design of Simple Connection for Rolled Sections (Shear connection)
These types of connection are applied to join member
(intermediate beam-beam) of the structure together at a
point such that forces can be transferred between them
safely. These are considered flexible and beams become
simply supported. In this case only the web is connected
with the other member because most of shear stresses
Figure 4-27 Double Angle Welded Connections (DAW-1)
are concentrated in the web.
The design of simple (shear) connection is commonly
based that the member is free to rotate because both
ends are pinned connected. Therefore, the design is
simple since the moment at both ends is zero. This
connection is usually based on the assumption that the
web of the section carries the entire shear acting on it.
Consequently, this connection is typically designed for Figure 4-28 Double Angle Bolted Connections (DAB-1)
shear only.
As shown in Figures 4-13 and 4-14 respectively, double angle welded (DAW-1) and double angle bolted
(DAB-1) connections are used for all intermediate beam-beam members. The designers prefer to use
connection for intermediate beam at gridline 3 and gridline E as a sample joint because it is where the
maximum shear occurs.
Figure 4-29 Orientation of intermediate beam for Simple Connection (DAW-1 and DAB-1)
4.2.1.7.3a Design of Simple Connection (Double Angle Welded)
The result of the analysis showed critical shear force at the intermediate gridline 3 and gridline E
connection as shown in figure 4-15. The critical shear force is equal to 88.1 kN. In the design of double
angle welded connection, two angle bars are placed on the web of the intermediate beam that acts as web
shear plate. As shown in Figure 4-16, double angle welded connection use 75x75x7 angle bar welded to
W27x407 beam and to W10x60 intermediate beam web using fillet weld (SMAW process). In using welding
electrodes, the higher electrodes used reduce the required length of fillet weld and as well as the length of
required plate. E6021 is applied in this connection since the web plate passed the designed length of the
fillet weld.
Figure 4-30 Sample design of Double Angle Welded connection (DAW-1)

In designing fillet welds, the designers used size of fillet weld of 6 mm because the thickness of the plate
should not be exceeded. Based on the limitations of section 510.2.2a of the NSCP 6 th edition (2010), it must
be considered that the minimum weld size is dependent upon the thickness of the two parts joined, except
that the weld size need not exceed the thickness of the thinner part. If the material is less than 6 mm or 6
mm thick, the maximum size of the weld should not be greater than the thickness of material. On the other
hand, if the material is greater than 6 mm in thickness, the maximum size of the fillet weld should not be
greater than the thickness of material minus 2 mm based on section 510.2.2b of NSCP (2010).
From the equation
Stress=
Reaction
Effective Areaof fillet weld
where in, the shear stress are 30% of the
minimum tensile strength (Fu = 415 MPa) of electrodes and the effective area of the fillet welds shall be
taken as the effective length times the effective throat thickness. The designers calculated the effective
length of the weld based on this derived equation
Length=
Reaction
0.707 ( weld )(0.3 Fu) and came up with
200 mm length of fillet weld as shown in Figure 4-17. Detailed computation is attached in Appendix E.
4.2.1.7.3b Design of Simple Connection (Double Angle Bolted)

Figure 4-31 Effective area of fillet weld
In the design of double angle bolted (DAB) connection, the materials is the same as in the double angular
welded (DAW) connection. The only difference is the procedure of connecting the elements since it is
bolted. As shown in Figure 4-18, double angle bolted connection use 75x75x7 angle bar bolted to
W27X407 beam and to W10X60 intermediate beam web using A325 bolt.
Figure 4-32 Sample design of Double Angle Bolted connection (DAB-1)

In designing bolts, the higher shear strength of bolt reduces the number of bolt and length of web plate
required. Using A325 bolt, the designers assume the diameter of bolt and added 1.6 mm for the size of
standard holes. To design the number of bolts, the designers calculated on total area of bolt for
intermediate beam due to its shear (double) and bearing stress, while the total area of bolt for beam is
designed due to shear (single) and bearing stress. The total area of bolt is divided to area of each bolt to
get the total number of bolts. In our design, we use two 16 mm diameter bolts for intermediate beam web
and four 16 mm diameter for beam web. Spacing of each bolt is designed based on provisions of section
510.3.3 of NSCP 6th edition, (2010). Distance between centers of standard holes shall not be less than
2
2
3
times the nominal diameter of the bolt nor less than 3d when Fp = 1.2 Fu is used.
Figure 4-33 Possible block shear failures (DAB-1)

Not all the time that only shear and bearing are checked as failure in this connection. Sometimes, the
allowable block shear strength shall also be considered. This failure is determine by computing the
allowable shear stress 0.30 Fu times the net shear area Av plus the allowable tensile stress 0.50 Fu times
the net tension area At as shown in Figure 4-19.
This design of double angle bolted connection with two 16 mm diameter bolts and 75x75x7 angular bar is
applied in all connection of intermediate beam and beam members. Detailed computations of double angle
bolted are attached in Appendix F.
4.2.1.7.4 Design of Moment Connections for Rolled Sections (Rigid connection)
Moment connections are designed to join members from seismic-resisting frames to resist both moment
and shear. These connections are often referred to as rigid connections as they provide full continuity
between the connected members and are designed to carry the full factored moments. Sample connection
in where the maximum moment occurs is shown in Figure 4-20.
Figure 4-34 Seismic-resisting frame (WFP-1 and BFP-1)

For this type of connection, we considered two options for moment connections: welded flange plate (WFP)
indicated in Figure 4-22 and bolted flange plate (BFP) shown in Figure 4-21 are compared. These types of
connections are selected based on prequalification of American Institute of Steel Construction (2010).
Prequalified Connections for Special and Intermediate Steel Moment Frames for Seismic Applications
(pp.39-50). United States of America.
4.2.1.7.4a Design of Moment Connection (Welded Flange Plate)

Figure 4-35 Welded Flange Plate (WFP-1)
Figure 4-36 Bolted Flange Plate (BFP-1)
Welded flange plate (WFP) connection provides plate welded to column. All plates are welded to column
flange using complete-joint-penetration (CJP) groove welds and plates to beam flange using fillet weld as
well as the plates to beam web. A detail for the design of this connection is shown in Figure 4-23.
Figure 4-37 Sample design of Welded Flange Plate (WFP-1)

With this connection, the moment is resisted by plates (A and B) welded to the top and bottom of beam
using fillet weld and to the column using complete-joint-penetration (CJP). The shear is transferred to the
column by vertical web plate (C) using CJP connection and fillet welded to beam web. Connection rupture
is controlled through special detailing requirements associated with all joining elements. Detailed
computations of WFP are attached in Appendix K.
The connection must satisfy all the limitations for joining members and connection in accordance with
section 510 of NSCP 6th edition (2010).
4.2.1.7.4b Design of Moment Connection (Bolted Flange Plate)
As shown in Figure 4.24 bolted flange plate (BFP) moment connection uses plates welded to column
flanges with complete-joint-penetration (CJP) groove welds and bolted to beam flanges with A325 bolts.
The beam web is connected to the column flange using a bolted single-plate shear connection with bolts in
standard holes.
The connection must satisfy Figure

all the4-38
limitations
joining
members
andPlate
connection
Samplefor
design
of Bolted
Flange
(BFP-1)in accordance with
th
section 510 of NSCP 6 edition (2010).
In the design of this connection, maximum moment is taken from the result of STAAD Pro. As general
provision in accordance to section 510 of NSCP 6 th edition (2010), the calculated stress shall be less than
the allowable stress determined by structural analysis for loads acting on the structure or as specified
proportion of the strength of the connected members, whichever is appropriate.
In selecting the diameter of bolt, it must be check that the edge distances and spacing for beam flange
holes satisfies the AISC specification requirements. Assume a flange plate thickness, tp. The connection
must satisfy all the limitations for joining members and connection in accordance with section 510 of NSCP
6th edition (2010).
the net tension area At as shown in Figure 4.22.Detailed computations of BFP are attached in Appendix F.
Figure 4-39 Possible block shear (BFP-1)
Installation Process for Moment Connections (WFP and BFP)
Installation process of moment connections (WFP and BFP). Reference: Bolduc M., Thomsen J., Zona J., (2007). Modern Steel Construction.A
tale of two projects.
4.2.1.7.5 Design of Composite Slab

The appropriate floor system for the framing plan is one-way because of the provisions of intermediate
beams where the ratio of the long panel dimension to short dimension is 0.38 which is less than 0.5.
In designing composite slab, the capacity of the steel deck must be deducted to the maximum moment
produced by the slab from dead and live load combinations. Then, the remaining moment will be carried by
the design reinforced bars.
The factored floor pressure (Wu) to be carried by the slab would be determined by using the load
combination followed by multiplying the factored floor pressure to a 1 meter strip from the slab to have the
uniform load
The designed reinforced steel bars were required to resist at least 6.45 kN-m. This was the remained
moment after using 1.5 x 6 gage 20 steel deck in the 14.35 kN-m moment produced by combination of
dead and live loads.
In designing reinforced steel bars, it must be considered first the w from the equation of
Mu = f'c bd^2 w (1-0.59 w)
Then determine the required ,
act=
f 'c
fy
min=
1.4
fy
'
max=
0.85 f c 600
fy (fy +600)
Then solve for the pmax and pmin and follow the provision bellow for knowing the design p
If p is less than pmax and greater than pmin, use p
If p is greater than pmax, increase the depth of slab to ensure ductile failure
If p is less than pmin, use p = pmin
Then determine the required area of steel and the spacing using the formula below,
As=bd S=
As
x 1000
Ab
In one-way floor system, we may be able to improve constructability since the concentration of the
reinforcing bars will be on one direction only.
4.2.1.7.6 Design of Foundation

For the location of this structure, geotechnical investigation found on this area that the foundation depth
beyond 4.5 meters will be resting on the sedimentary rock formation. Bearing capacity of this soil formation
found to be 400 kPa or 8400 psf. The structure with a basement level at 4.2 meters below from the ground
floor level plus the required or minimum depth of the foundation will rest on this soil condition. With this
sufficient soil allowable bearing pressure, the designers decided to use isolated footing for the design of
foundation.
Figure _ shows respective design of footing for each column; designers used design of square footing for
all columns except for those columns with sufficient distance shown on the same figure to be design as
combined footing.
Detailed requirement for this design foundation is generally in accordance to NSCP section 305, design of
structural footing for this structure was based on standards and provision as provided in NSCP chapter 4.
4.2.2 Design of Structure using Built-up Sections

In this section, the designers will present its design of the structure when the framing system used built-up
section as material. As shown in Figure 4-26, the columns and beams of the steel frame is constructed with
built-up sections and designed as dual system combining special moment-resisting frame and shear wall.
The elevator shaft at the center of the structure is considered as shear wall. Intermediate beams are
provided to effect one-way slab design for the flooring system.
Figure 4-40Structural frame for Built-up Section
In accordance to section 208.4 of NSCP 6 th Edition (2010), the structural system that we used is classified
as dual system because of the integration of moment frames and shear wall. Resistance to lateral load is
provided by shear wall and moment-resisting frames shall be designed to independently resist at least 25
percent of the design base shear. The 75% of base shear shall be resisted by the shear wall.
4.2.2.1 Column-Beam Framing Plans of the Structure using Built-up Sections

The locations of the columns in the basement through the roof deck were the same except at grids A and H
where it is terminated at ground to 7 th Floor. The parameters that we followed in planning for the framing
constitute the space design of the architect, economical span to depth ratio for the columns and beams and
overall ease of traffic flow at the basement. We also considered the position of the gravity and lateral force
resisting framing system as shown Figure 4-27 4-28. It also indicated the labels for the columns, beams
and slab elements.
Figure 4-41 Orientation of girders, beams and columns for ground floor
FigureConnections
4-42 Orientation of girders, beams and columns for 2nd to 7th floor
4.2.2.1.1 Column-Beam
For column-beam connection we considered two types of connection design for seismic resistance framing
and simply supported beams. For simply supported beams, double angle welded and double angle bolted
under simple connection is used. For seismic resisting and gravity load frames, welded flange plate and
bolted flange plate under moment connection is used.
Figure 4-29 shows the highlighted member assigned as seismic-resisting frame of the structure. The
seismic-resisting frame acted as support for gravity loads and resistance to lateral loads. The designers
assumed the members on this frame to be fixed at both ends.
Figure 4-43 Seismic-resisting frame of the structure

Figure 4.30 shows the location for gravity load frame of the steel building. The gravity load frames provided
resistance to all vertical loads and assumed pinned at both ends. In such cases, the analysis is
uncomplicated because this can be considered as simply supported.
4.2.2.2 Floor Framing Plan of Structure

using
Built-up
Section
Figure 4-44
Gravity
load frame
of the structure
The appropriate floor system for our framing plan is one-way because of our provisions of intermediate
beams where the ratio of the long panel dimension to short dimension is 0.38 which is less than 0.5. In oneway floor system, we may be able to improve constructability since the concentration of the reinforcing bars
will be on one direction only. Floor framing plan is shown in section 4.2.2.1 Figure 4-27 4-28.
4.2.2.3 Structure Supports
In planning for the foundation of the structure, we provided two design options for footings. Isolated footings
are to be implemented for entire columns except for those at gridlines A and H along gridlines 1 to 4 which
are designed as combined footings because they are close together and may cause overlap of adjacent
isolated footing. Locations of footings are shown in Figure 4-31.
4.2.2.4 Material Properties of Built-up Sections

Based on section on ASEP vol.1 (2004)Figure
the minimum
quality requirement
for built-up shape fabrication is
4-45 Foundation
plan
structural steel conforming to ASTM A36. Dimensions and properties are selected base on section on
ASEP except for the torsional constant of section that is computed manually.In this structure, the designers
used A36 for built-up sections with minimum yield stress of 248 MPa and tensile strength of 400-551 MPa.
The beam web and flanges shall be connected using either CJP groove weld or pair of fillet welds in
accordance with the AISC Seismic Provisions.
For connections, the use of A325 bolts is considered conforming to ASTM specifications under section
501.3.4 of NSCP 6th edition (2010). This bolt is used for the entire joining members of the steel structure.
4.2.2.5 Loadings of the Structure using Built-up Sections
The design loadings for a steel structure are specified in codes. The designers used two types of codes to
indicate the loads that act on the structure. National Building Codes of the Philippines specified the
minimum design loads and standards for construction and the National Structural Code of the Philippines
provided the detailed standards and loads for actual design.
4.2.2.5.1 Primary Loadings

Dead Loads
Corresponding loads of the following materials listed below were based on section 204 of NSCP 6 th edition
(2010). The actual weights of materials are applied in determining dead loads; minimum values per floor
are permitted in Tables 4-7.
1. Masonry concrete (Solid portion) = 23.6 kPa
2. Steel decking 18 gage = 0.14 kPa
3. Ceramic of Quarry tile (20mm) on 25 mm mortar bed = 1.53 kPa
4. Concrete masonry units
A. Exterior wall Concrete masonry, 150 mm width thickness (Including plaster w/ an
B. Interior wall Concrete masonry, 100 mm width thickness (Including plaster w/ an
5. Wall partition loads based on section 204.3 of NSCP 6 th edition (2010) where office buildings and
other buildings where partition location are subject to change shall e designed to support, in
addition to all other loads, a uniformly distributed dead load = 1 kPa of floor area
6. Ceiling system
A. Suspended metal lath and gypsum board =0.48 kPa
B. Mechanical duct allowance = 0.20 kPa
Table 4-19 Uniform Loads on Slab Produce by Gravity Loads in kPa
Ground floor
Floor level
Basement level
Occupancy
Category
Description
Parking
Parking
Lobbies and
office
Corridor
office
Office use
Storage whole
commercial
sale
commercial
General storage
Dead load(kPa)
12.0
5.3
5.3
5.3
6.3
2nd to 7th
Office and
commercial
Residential
Residential
Residential
Residential
Exit Facilities
5.3
Basic Floor area

Corridor
Restrooms
storage
6.3
5.3
6.3
6.3
Roof deck
Live Loads
Table 4-10 below shows the summarized loadings for types of occupancy to be considered in the design of
live load which is based on section 205.3.1 table 205.1 of NSCP 6 th edition (2010) for the Minimum uniform
floor live load.
Table 4-20 Occupancy Live Loads
Floor level
Basement level
Ground floor
2nd to 7th
Ground floor
Roof deck
Occupancy
Live load(kPa)
Category
Description
1.9
Lobbies and
office
4.8
Corridor
office
Office use
2.4
Storage whole
commercial
6.0
sale
commercial
General storage
4.8
Office and
Exit Facilities
4.8
commercial
Residential
Basic Floor area
1.9
Residential
Corridor
3.8
Residential
Restrooms
1.9
Residential
storage
1.9
Same as area served of occupancy
4.2.2.5.2 Load Combinations

This load modeling of the structure depends on the loadings specifications and parameters stated above.
This section shows all the parameters used to help the designers analyze the structure using STAAD
Table 4-21 Load Combination used in STAAD Pro V8i
Case Load No.
8
9
10
Description
DL + LL
DL + 0.75 LL
DL + WL
Parameters
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
DL + 0.7 EL
DL + 0.7 EL
DL + 0.75 WL + 0.75 LL
DL + 0.525 EL + 0.75 LL
DL + 0.525 EL + 0.75 LL
0.6 DL + WL
0.6 DL + 0.7 EL
0.6 DL + 0.7 EL

4.2.2.5.3 Earthquake Loads

Parameters for seismic analysis stated below are based on section 208 of NSCP 6 th edition (2010). These
earthquake provisions herein are primarily to safeguard against major structural failures and human
casualty, and to limit damages or maintain function.
1. Earthquake force resisting system: Dual system for both X and Z axis of frames.
2. Seismic zone: Zone 4 (Where the structure is located in NCR region)
3. Seismic Source Type A as influenced by valley fault system
4. Soil profile type: Sc (foundations on sedimentary rock)
Having Near-Source Factor of Na = 1.2 and Nv = 1.6
5. Seismic source: 10 km (The structure is 20 km away from the nearest fault line which is the
valley fault)
These specifications are shown in Table 4-12 and also specified in geotechnical investigation report
conducted by LPR Soil Boring and Well Drilling Services.
Table 4-22 Tabulated Seismic Parameters
Parameters
Zone
Importance Factor (I)
Rw in X Direction (RWx)
Rw in Z Direction (RWz)
Soil Profile Type (STYP)
Near Source Factor (Na)
Near Source Factor (Nv)
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
Value
0.4
1
5.5
5.5
3
1.2
1.6
4.2.2.5.4 Wind Loads

The structure shall be designed and constructed to resist wind load. The designed wind load, determined
using STAAD Pro shall not be less than specified in section 207 of NSCP 6 th edition (2010).
1. Frame system for wind load resistance: Components and cladding
2. Zone classification: Zone 2 (with corresponding wind speed of 200 km/h by means of its location
as stated in the previous chapter)
3. Exposure category: Surface roughness B (Where the structure is located in a suburban area)
4. Occupancy category: standard occupancy
5. Enclosure classification: Partially enclosed building (NSCP section 207.2)
Table 4-23 Wind Load Parameters
Parameters
Building Classification Category
Basic Wind Speed
Exposure Category
Structure Type
:
:
:
:
Value
Category IV
200 km/h
Exposure B
Building Structure
4.2.2.6 Structural Analysis of Structure using Built-up Sections

After framing planning and preparing important data for the analysis of the structure, we will now model the
structure using STAAD Pro.
There were several steps in modeling the structure using STAAD pro. First, we entered the column-beam
framing plan using graphical user interface (GUI). For moment resisting frames we assumed all
connections as fixed and gravity load frames were assumed to have certain rotational degrees of freedom
along the global X, Y and Z coordinates. Next, we provided the model with material properties. We used the
section for built-up section provided in the program. These built-up sections were also similar to our ASEP
Steel Handbook (2004).
In modeling the slab we used four noded plate elements and surface element for elevator shaft and
basement wall.
In modeling the loads we defined first the lateral loads composed of wind and seismic parameters. For the
wind load we entered the parameters as describe in section 4.2.2.5.4. We automated the wind load using
ASCE 7 (2010) for the wind intensities. We also inputted the seismic parameters as described in section
4.2.2.5.3. Then, we entered primary and load combinations.
The supports for the structure were all assumed the column bases to be pinned, that are, not transmitting
any bending moments to the foundation.
Shown in Figure 4-32 is the completed model in STAAD Pro.
4.2.2.6.1 Result of Structural Analysis

The designers selected one critical section for each framing along longitudinal and transverse dimension of
Figure 4-46 Completed model of steel frame using STAAD Pro
the structure in the analysis and design. Frame along gridline 4 is critical for seismic analysis and its
maximum moment is 1288 kN-m as shown in Figure 4-33. Table 4-12 shows the maximum moments per
floor along the critical frame.
Figure 4-47 Critical frame for seismic analysis

Table 4-24 Maximum Moment in Critical frame
Maximum Moment
Maximum Shear
Loadings
Loadings
(kN-m)
(kN)
1. EQ.X
1. EQ.X
1038
400
Ground Floor
1. EQ.X
1. EQ.X
763
230
2nd to 7th Floor
1. EQ.X
8. DL + LL
49.6
38.3
Roof Deck
Designation
Loadings Maximum Axial
Loadings
Maximum Moment
1.
EQ.X
12.
DL + 0.7 EL
1288
2100
Basement
1. EQ.X
15. DL + .525 EL + .75 LL
685
2027
Ground Floor
1. EQ.X
15. DL + .525 EL + .75 LL
534
1690
2nd to 3rd Floor
1. EQ.X
8. DL + LL
382
1059
4th to 5th Floor
1. EQ.X
8. DL + LL
50.9
208
6th to 7th Floor
Table 4-14 shown are maximum moments for the critical frame. These results from the STAAD are used for
the sample design of columns and girders.
COLUMNS
BEAMS
Designation
As shown in Figure 4-34 horizontal displacements or drifts of the critical frame are computed, this results
must not exceed the allowable drift as required by section 208.5.9 of the NSCP 6 th edition (2010).From the
result of STAAD Pro v8i, the maximum horizontal drift of the structure (41 mm) does not exceed the
allowable drift of 75 mm.
Figure 4-48 Displacement of the critical frame
As shown in Figure 4-35, the loadings acted on the frame transmitted moments that produced bending on
each member. The bending stress produced by these loadings must not exceed the computed allowable
bending stress.
4.2.2.7 Design of Structural Members using Built-up Sections

After the analysis of the frame using
built-up
the designers
areframe
now able to design the members
Figure
4-49sections,
Bending stress
for critical
of frame such as columns, beams and connections. The design processes for members are discussed in
subsequent sections.
4.2.2.7.1 Design of Beams (Built-up Sections)
The result of the analysis showed maximum moment of 1038 kN-m for beam members along gridline 4 at
ground floor level as shown in Table 4-14. This maximum moment will be implemented for the design of all
beams along gridline 1 and 4 on the ground level because the loadings in these gridlines were the same.
The designers oriented the beams based on their loadings to attain economical of the built-up sections.
The design of the beams were assumed to be fixed at both ends since it was included in moment-resisting
frames while the beams for gravity load frames were assumed to be pin supported.
In the selection of built-up sections for the design, the designers considered the dimension and internal
aspect such as weight and depth of the section. In this way, we were able to select built-up sections in
terms of economical as well as optimizing section.
In the design of beams sections, we initially assumed the beams as non-compact. This assumption gives
allowance or factor of safety than the other possible compactness of section. From this assumption, the
designers computed the section modulus that serves as basis in the selection of appropriate section for the
final design. This section is to be selected from built-up shapes section as provided in ASEP Steel
Handbook. The designers must select at least equal or greater than from the initial computed value and
check its adequacy from all possible failures of the section. This involves shear, bending and deflection
failures as discussed below.
Considering the maximum moment of 1038kN-m acting on the critical beam member from moment resisting
frame, initial section modulus is to be computed using this equation:
Sx =
Actual moment max . 1038 x 103

=
=6975.81 x 103 mm3
0.60 F y
0.60 x 248
With the computed section modulus, the designers may now select trial sections from the ASEP steel
handbook for the final design as listed in Table 4-15.
Table 4-25 Trial Sections for Design of Beam
Section
BW 800 X 296
BW 800 x 212
BW 900 x 347
Section modulus
Beam depth ( d )
10,160x103 mm3
7,814 x 103 mm3
6440 x 103 mm3
800 mm
800 mm
900 mm
Web thickness
(t w )
20mm
12 mm
28 mm
Section
BW 800 X 296
BW 800 x 212
BW 900 x 347
b
Flange base ( f )
736 mm
360 mm
300 mm
Flange thickness
(t f )
32 mm
25 mm
62.74 mm
Weight of beam (w)
296 mm
212 mm
415 mm
From the selected sections, the designers chose to design the lightest section which is BW 800 X 296 to
provide lesser cost for the steel material.
Table 4-26 Classification of BW 800 X 296 Rolled Section
Stiffen element
b f /2t f
11.92
170/
F y
Remarks
10.79
Partially
Compact
Un-stiffen element
d /t w
40
1680/
F y
Remarks
106.68
Compact
Since the section is compact, therefore the allowable bending stress is equal to 0.66
Fy
= Fb. The
actual bending stress must not exceed the allowable bending stress; the stress can be computed using
formula:
Ra
Where:
Rn
Equation 4.2.2.1
Ra
= required strength (ASD)
Rn
= nominal strength, specified in section 502 through 511
= safety factor, specified in section 502 through 511
Rn /
= allowable strength
Allowable Bending Stress

Allowable bending stress for built-up section shall satisfy these conditions:
h 2547
<
tw F y
When :
b f 250
<
2 tf
Fy
Kc
Where
h 0.46
tw
4.05
K c=
if
K c =1.0
Otherwise
Fb =F y 0.790.000762
When :
h 2547
>
tw F y
h
< 70
tw
bf
2 tf
]
Fy
Kc
Equation 4.2.2.2
Fb ' Fb R PG R e
Where
Equation 4.2.2.3
RPG
= built-up bending strength reduction factor
Fb
= applicable bending stress
RPG =10.0005
A w h 1996
t w tw F b
Shearing Stress
Built-up sections must satisfy:
F v =0.40 F y
Equation 4.2.2.4
Actual Shear Stress
f v=
V
dtw
Equation 4.2.2.5
For Deflection of Beams:

Maximum deflections of steel beams due to vertical loads can be computed using formula below, but the
computed deflection must not exceed
L
360 of span. For the design of the beams, two types of load
occurred. For uniformly loaded beams which are simply supported at both ends, the maximum deflection
can be computed using formula.
4
5W L
384 EI
Equation 4.2.2.6
And for two concentrated load acting on fixed end beams, the maximum deflection is computed using.
5 P L3
=
648 EI
Equation 4.2.2.7
Detailed computation of each beam on the frame is attached in Appendix H.

4.2.2.7.2 Design of Columns (Built-up sections)
The result of the analysis showed maximum moment of 1288 kN-m with axial load of 2100 kN for column
members along gridline 4 at basement level. This maximum moment and axial load will be implemented for
the design of all columns on the basement level. The designers oriented the columns per two floors except
for basement and ground level which was oriented per floor. With this, we can obtain economical and
appropriate columns.
In the design of columns at basement, the column bases were assumed to be pinned, that are, not
transmitting any bending moments to the foundation or it is free to rotate but translation fixed. For ground to
succeeding floors, all columns were assumed to be rotation and translation fixed at both ends.
In the selection of built-up sections for the design of columns, the designers considered the dimension and
internal aspect such as weight and depth of the section. In this way, we were able to select built-up sections
Columns occurred in the design were subjected to axial compression and bending stresses. Most of the
columns that has larger axial load than the moment were considered by the designers since it is more
critical and it produced larger dimension in the final design. Detailed computations of columns are attached
in Appendix I.
At first, the designers classified the columns according to slenderness ratio to determine its allowable
compressive stress using these equations.
When:
KL
< Cc
r
(Intermediate Column)
KL /r 2
Fy
F .S.
1
F a=
Equation 4.2.1.23
KL /r 3
5 3( KL/r)
F . S .= +
3
8C c
2 2 E
Fy
Where:
C c=
When:
KL
> Cc
r
(Long Column)
Equation 4.2.1.24
KL /r
23
12 2 E
Fa =
Cc
Where:
Equation 4.2.1.25
= slenderness ratio which defines the limit between intermediate column
and long column.

E
= modulus of elasticity of steel (200 GPa)
Fy
= yield stress of steel
= effective length factor
Fa
= allowable compressive stress
Axial Compression and Bending

The members are then subjected to both axial and bending stress acting simultaneously.
f=
P MC
A
I
f=
P M x Cx M y C y
A
Ix
Iy
= stress
(Bending in one axis only)
Equation 4.2.2.8
(Bending in both axis)
Equation 4.2.2.9
Where:
P = concentrated or axial load, kN

A = cross sectional area, mm2
C = distance from the neutral axis to the extreme fiber, mm
I =moment of inertia due to neutral axis, mm 4
Axial Compression with Bending
Members subjected to both axial compression and bending stresses shall be proportioned to satisfy the
following requirements:
fa
+
Fa
C mx fb x
Cmy fb y
+
1.0
fa
fa
(1 ' ) Fbx ( 1 ' )Fb y
F ey
F ex
Equation
4.2.2.10
When
fa
f
f
+ bx + by 1.0
0.60 F y Fbx F by
Equation 4.2.2.11
fa
0.15
Fa
Equation 4.2.2.12
f a f bx f by
+
+
1.0
F a Fb x F by
Equation
4.2.2.13
Where :
P
A
fa
= computed axial stress,
fb
= computed compressive bending stress
Fa =
Fa
= axial compressive stress that would permitted if axial force alone existed
Fb
= compressive bending stress that would be permitted if bending moment
alone existed
2
K l/r
23
12 E
F ' e=
Lb
=un-braced length in plane of bending
rb
= radius of gyration in the plane of bending
K = effective length factor in plane of bending
Equation 4.2.2.14
Cm
= Coefficient whose value shall be taken as follows:

a. For compression members in frame subjected to joint translation (side sway),
Cm
= 0.85
Equation 4.2.2.15
b. For rotationally restrained compression members in frames braced against joints

translation and not subjected to transverse loading between their supports in the plane
of bending,
Cm
Where
M2
= 0.6 - 0.4 ( M 1 /
M 1 /M 2
Equation 4.2.2.16
= is the ratio of the smaller to larger moments at the ends of the
proportion of the members un-braced in the plane of bending under

consideration.
c. For compression members in frames braced against joint translation in the plane of
loading and subjected to transverse loading between their supports.
1. For members whose ends are restrained against rotation in the plane of
Cm
bending.
= 0.85
2. For members whose ends are unrestrained against rotation in the plane of
Cm
bending.
= 1.0
Detailed computation of built-up sections for column and beams are attached in Appendix H and Appendix
I.
Connections
The designers classified the connection to be used in the structural steel frame. These connections are
also applied to the first designed structure using built-up sections since the only difference is the value of
internal forces that the connections need to transmit, the designers came up with the use of simple (shear)
and moment (rigid) connections. Simple connections are applied for all intermediate beams and gravity
load frames while moment connections are implemented for seismic-resisting frames.
For simple (shear) connections and moment (rigid) connections, the designers typically provided two
options for both connections: For simple connection, double angle welded (DAW) indicated in Figure 4-36
and double angle bolted (DAB) shown in Figure 4-37 were compared as connection to be used for all
intermediate beam and gravity load frames. For moment connections, welded flange plate (WFP) indicated
in Figure 4.43 and bolted flange plate (BFP) shown in Figure 4.42 were also distinguished as connection for
seismic-resisting frames.
4.2.2.7.3 Design of Simple Connection for Built-up Sections (Shear connection)
These types of connection are applied to join member
(intermediate beam-beam) of the structure together at a
point such that forces can be transferred between them
safely. These are considered flexible and beams become
simply supported. In this case only the web is connected
with the other member because most of shear stresses
Figure 4-50 Double Angle Welded Connections (DAW-1)
are concentrated in the web.
The design of simple (shear) connection is commonly
based that the member is free to rotate because both
ends are pinned connected. Therefore, the design is
simple since the moment at both ends is zero. This
connection is usually based on the assumption that the
web of the section carries the entire shear acting on it.
Consequently, this connection is typically designed for Figure 4-51 Double Angle Bolted Connections (DAB-1)
shear only.
As shown in Figure 4-44 and Figure 4-45, double angle welded (DAW-1) and double angle bolted (DAB-1)
connections is used for all intermediate beam-beam members. As shown in Figure 4-38, the designers
prefer to use connection for intermediate beam at gridline 3 and gridline E as a sample joint because it is
where the maximum shear occurs.
Figure 4-52 Orientation of intermediate beam for Simple Connection (DAW-1 and DAB-1)
4.2.2.7.3a Design of Simple Connection (Double Angle Welded)

The result of the analysis showed critical shear force at the intermediate gridline 3 and gridline E
connection as shown in figure 4-38. The critical shear force is equal to 82.1 kN. In the design of double
angle welded connection, two angle bars are placed on the web of the intermediate beam that acts as web
shear plate. Double angle welded connection use 75x75x7 angle bar welded to BW900x496 beam and to
BW450x83 intermediate beam web using fillet weld (SMAW process) as shown if Figure 4-39. In using
welding electrodes, the higher electrodes used reduces the required length of fillet weld and as well as the
length of required plate. E6021 is applied in this connection since the web plate passed the designed length
of the fillet weld.
Figure 4-53 Sample design of Double Angle Welded connection (DAW-1)

In designing fillet welds, the designers used size of fillet weld of 6 mm because the thickness of the plate
shall not be exceeded. Based on the limitations of section 510.2.2a of the NSCP 6 th edition (2010), it must
be considered that the minimum weld size is dependent upon the thickness of the two parts joined, except
that the weld size need not exceed the thickness of the thinner part. If the material is less than 6 mm or 6
mm thick, the maximum size of the weld should not be greater than the thickness of material. On the other
hand, if the material is greater than 6 mm in thickness, the maximum size of the fillet weld should not be
greater than the thickness of material minus 2 mm based on section 510.2.2b of NSCP (2010).
From the equation
Stress=
Reaction
Effective Areaof fillet weld
where in, the shear stress are 30% of the
minimum tensile strength (Fu = 415 MPa) of electrodes and the effective area of the fillet welds shall be
taken as the effective length times the effective throat thickness. The designers calculated the effective
length of the weld based on this derived equation
Length=
Reaction
0.707 ( weld )(0.3 Fu) and came up with
200 mm length of fillet weld as shown in Figure 4-40. Detailed computation is attached in Appendix I.
4.2.2.7.3b Design of Simple Connection (Double Angle Bolted)

Figure 4-54 Effective area of fillet weld
In the design of double angle bolted (DAB) connection, the materials is the same as in the double angular
welded (DAW) connection. The only difference is the procedure of connecting the elements since it is
bolted. As shown in Figure 4-41, double angle bolted connection use 75x75x7 angle bar bolted to
BW900x496 beam and to BW450x83 intermediate beam web using A325 bolt.
Figure 4-55 Sample design of Double Angle Bolted Connection (DAB-1)

In designing bolts, the higher shear strength of bolt reduces the number of bolt and length of web plate
required. Using A325 bolt, the designer assume the diameter of bolt and added 1.6 mm for the size of
standard holes. To design the number of bolts, the designer calculated on total area of bolt for intermediate
beam due to its shear (double) and bearing stress, while the total area of bolt for beam is designed due to
shear (single) and bearing stress. The total area of bolt is divided to diameter of one bolt to get the total
number of bolts. In our design, we use two 16 mm diameter bolts for intermediate beam web and four 16
mm diameter for beam web. Spacing of each bolt is designed based on provisions of section 510.3.3 of
NSCP 6th edition, (2010). Distance between centers of standard holes shall not be less than
the nominal diameter of the bolt nor less than 3d when Fp = 1.2 Fu is used.
2
3
times
Figure 4-56 Possible block shear failures (DAB-1)
the net tension area At as shown in Figure 4-42.
This design of double angle bolted connection with two 16 mm diameter bolts and 75x75x7 angular bar is
applied in all connection of intermediate beam and beam members. Detailed computations of double angle
bolted are attached in Appendix J.
4.2.2.7.4 Design of Moment Connections for Built-up Sections (Rigid connection)
Moment connections are designed to join members from seismic-resisting frames to resist both moment
and shear. These connections are often referred to as rigid connections as they provide full continuity
between the connected members and designed to carry the full factored moments. Maximum moment
occurs on node 146 as shown in Figure 4-43.
Figure 4-57two
Seismic-resisting
frameconnections:
(WFP-1 and welded
BFP-1) flange plate (WFP)
For this type of connection, we considered
options for moment
indicated in Figure 4-44 and bolted flange plate (BFP) shown in Figure 4-45 are compared. These types of
connections are selected based on prequalification of American Institute of Steel Construction (2010).
Prequalified Connections for Special and Intermediate Steel Moment Frames for Seismic Applications
(pp.39-50). United States of America.
4.2.2.7.4a Design of Moment Connection (Welded Flange Plate)

Figure plate
4-58 Welded
Flange Plateprovides
(WFP-1)plate welded
Figure
4-59 Bolted
Flange
(BFP-1)
Welded flange
(WFP) connection
to column.
All plates
arePlate
welded
to column
flange using complete-joint-penetration (CJP) groove welds and plates to beam flange using fillet weld as
well as the plates to beam web. A detail for the design of this connection is shown in Figure 4-46.
With this connection, the moment is resisted by plates (A and B) welded to the top and bottom of beam
using fillet weld and to the column using complete-joint-penetration (CJP). The shear is transferred to the
column by vertical web plate (C) using CJP connection and fillet welded to beam web. Connection rupture
is controlled through special detailing requirements associated with all joining elements. Detailed
computations of WFP are attached in Appendix K.
section 510 of NSCP 6th edition (2010).
Figure 4-60 Sample design of Welded Flange Plate (WFP-1)

4.2.2.7.4b Design of Moment Connection (Bolted Flange Plate)
As shown in Figure 4-47 bolted flange plate (BFP) moment connection uses plates welded to column
flanges with complete-joint-penetration (CJP) groove welds and bolted to beam flanges with A325 bolts.
The beam web is connected to the column flange using a bolted single-plate shear connection with bolts in
standard holes.
section 510 of NSCP 6th edition
Figure
(2010).
4-61 Sample design of Bolted Flange Plate (BFP-1)
In the design of this connection, maximum moment is taken from the result of STAAD Pro. As general
provision in accordance to section 510 of NSCP 6 th edition (2010), the calculated stress shall be less than
the allowable stress determined by structural analysis for loads acting on the structure or as specified
proportion of the strength of the connected members, whichever is appropriate.
In selecting the diameter of bolt, it must be check that the edge distance and spacing for beam flange holes
satisfies the AISC specification requirements. Assume a flange plate thickness, tp.
the net tension area At as shown in Figure 4-48.Detailed computations of BFP are attached in Appendix J.
Figure 4-62 Possible block shear (BFP-1)

Installation Process for Moment Connections (WFP and BFP)
Installation process of moment connections (WFP and BFP). Reference: Bolduc M., Thomsen J., Zona J., (2007). Modern Steel Construction.A
tale of two projects.
4.2.2.7.5 Design of Composite Slab

The appropriate floor system for the framing plan is one-way because of the provisions of intermediate
beams where the ratio of the long panel dimension to short dimension is 0.38 which is less than 0.5.
In designing composite slab, the capacity of the steel deck must be deducted to the maximum moment
produced by the slab from dead and live load combinations. Then, the remaining moment will be carried by
the design reinforced bars.
The factored floor pressure (Wu) to be carried by the slab would be determined by using the load
combination followed by multiplying the factored floor pressure to a 1 meter strip from the slab to have the
uniform load
The designed reinforced steel bars were required to resist at least 6.45 kN-m. This was the remained
moment after using 1.5 x 6 gage 20 steel deck in the 14.35 kN-m moment produced by combination of
dead and live loads.
In designing reinforced steel bars, it must be considered first the w from the equation of
Mu = f'c bd^2 w (1-0.59 w)
Then determine the required ,
act=
f 'c
fy
min=
1.4
fy
max=
0.85 f ' c 600

fy (fy +600)
Then solve for the pmax and pmin and follow the provision bellow for knowing the design p
If p is less than pmax and greater than pmin, use p
If p is greater than pmax, increase the depth of slab to ensure ductile failure
If p is less than pmin, use p = pmin
Then determine the required area of steel and the spacing using the formula below,
As=bd S=
As
x 1000
Ab
In one-way floor system, we may be able to improve constructability since the concentration of the
reinforcing bars will be on one direction only.
4.2.2.7.6 Design of Foundation

For the location of this structure, geotechnical investigation found on this area that the foundation depth
beyond 4.5 meters will be resting on the sedimentary rock formation. Bearing capacity of this soil formation
found to be 400 kPa or 8400 psf. The structure with a basement level at 4.2 meters below from the ground
floor level plus the required or minimum depth of the foundation will rest on this soil condition. With this
sufficient soil allowable bearing pressure, the designers decided to use isolated footing for the design of
foundation.
Figure _ shows respective design of footing for each column; designers used design of square footing for
all columns except for those columns with sufficient distance shown on the same figure to be design as
combined footing.
Detailed requirement for this design foundation is generally in accordance to NSCP section 305, design of
structural footing for this structure was based on standards and provision as provided in NSCP chapter 4.
4.2.3. Validation of Multiple Constraints, Trade-offs and Standards

This section serves as validation of the initial rankings made in chapter 3. As a review, a strategy was to
select the performance of rolled and built-up sections for column and beam members of steel frame, the
connection for simply supported beams using double angle welded and double angle bolted under simple
connection and welded flange plate and bolted flange plate under moment connection for seismic-resisting
frames. These trade-offs are designed in accordance with the design constraints such as economic,
constructability and environmental (safety). After considering the constraints and the final designs, the
designers came up with the final rankings.
Using the model on trade-off strategies in engineering design (Otto & Antonson, 1991), the designers
computed the ability to satisfy the criterion using the same procedure as discussed in chapter 3.
Table 4-27 Designer Rankings for Sections
Rolled Steel Sections Built-up Steel Sections

Sections
Criterion's
Importance
(scale of 0 to 5)
1. Economic (Cost)
-4
36
41
2. Environmental
(Resistant to Seismic)
2. Manufacturability
(Fabrication of Section)
Total =
pages 87-104.Retrieved from http://www.design.caltech.edu/Research/Publications/90e.pdf on March 11, 2013.
In the final design rankings, the designers ranked economic as five (5) since the cost provided greater
impact on the final design and as the client specified. As the designers, we must ensure the safety and
capability of the structure to withstand lateral loads that is why environmental ranked as four (4).
Manufacturability of sections is ranked as one (1) since it does not affect the duration of construction and
because of their great difference in fabrication and it is somehow became a part of economic constraints.
Economic (Cost).Based on the final design, built-up sections got higher ranking because it gave lighter
section than the rolled sections produced, therefore, the lesser the weight of the
sections, the lesser the cost will be.
Environmental (Resistant to Seismic). In the result of the analysis of lateral drift along the weaker axis (Yaxis). Both sections passed the allowable drift, but frame composed of built-up sections
provided lower drift value that is why it is ranked higher than the rolled sections.
Manufacturability (Fabrication of section).the result of final design gave higher ranking on rolled sections
since it doesnt need fabrication anymore and it is ready to install at the time it was
delivered.
Final Estimate for Sections (Rolled and Built-up)
Table 4-18 and 4.-19 listed below are the total cost estimates and fabrication of sections which show the
difference between rolled and built-up. The rankings for ability of materials to satisfy the criterions are also
Antonsson (1991).Detailed final estimate of sections is attached in the Appendices L and Appendix M.
Table 4-28 Cost Estimate for Sections (Rolled and Built-up)
Type of Materials
Total
Rolled Section
Php
52,096,405.10
Built-up Section
Php
41,000,052.37

Where:
difference=
52,096,405.141,000,052.4
x 10=2.13 say 2
52,096,405.1
Loosing Value=52=3
Table 4-29 Duration of Construction for Sections (Rolled and Built-up)

Type of Materials
Duration
Rolled Section
Built-up Section
744 Man-hour
14716 Man-hour
The final estimate of the duration of construction (fabrication) is attached in Appendix M.
Computation of Ranking for Constructability (Fabrication):

Where:
difference=
14,716744
x 10=9.4 say 9
14,716
Loosing Value=59=4
Table 4-30 Safety of Sections against Lateral Force (Rolled and Built-up)
Type of Materials
Average of Drift
Rolled Section
31.2 mm
Built-up Section
27.9 mm
Computation of Ranking for Environmental (Resistant to Seismic)

Where:
difference=
31.227.9
x 10=1.06 say 1
31.2
LoosingValue=51=4
Table 4-31 Designer Rankings for Simple Connections (Built-up Section)

Double Angle Bolted
Double Angle Welded

Simple Connections
Criterion's
Importance
(scale of 0 to 5)
1. Economic (Cost)
2. Constructability
30
31
Total =
In the final design rankings, the designers ranked economic as five (5) because it became the denominator
of all constraints since the clients specified that the budget is to be observed. In constructability, the number
of joints in where the simple shear connections are used are fewer than that on the moment connections so
it is ranked as two (2).
Economical (Cost).After the final design, double angle welded got higher rankings because it provided
lower cost in the total expenses for material and labor than the cost of double angle
bolted produced.
Constructability (Construction Duration).Simple shear connections are fewer than moment connections
since it is only applied for the intermediate beams of frames. Double angle bolted ranked
higher because it is easier to install than the double angle welded
Final Cost Estimate for Simple Connections (Double Angle Welded and Double Angle Bolted)
Table 4-22 and 4-23 listed below are the total cost estimates and installation of connections which show the
difference between DAW and DAB. The rankings for ability of materials to satisfy the criterions are also
Antonsson (1991). Detailed computation is attached in the Appendix N.
Table 4-32 Cost Estimate for Simple Connections (DAB Connections)
Item
Quantity
I. A325 Bolts
II. seat angle plate
III crane rent
3136 pcs
830.84 kg
Material Cost
per kg
Php 93,766.40
Php 36,889.47
Labor Cost
(man-hr)
235 man-hr
19 man-hr
50 per hr
total =
Total
Php 104,056.40
Php 37,720.32
Php 244,000.00
Php 291,766.72
Table 4-33 Cost Estimate for Simple Connections (DAW Connections)

Item
I. E70xx 1/8"
II. A36 Plate
III crane rent
Quantity
1861.78 kg
552.9 kg
material cost
per kg
Php 111,706.8
Php 24,548.76
Labor cost
(man-hr)
313 man-hr
10man-hr
32 per hr
total =
Total
Php 131,255.5
Php 24,986.26
Php
96,000
Php 252,241.8

Where:
difference=
291,766.7252,241.8
x 10=1.35 say 1
291,766.7
LoosingValue=51=4
Table 4-34 Duration of Construction for Simple Connection (DAB and DAW)
Type of Materials
Double Angle
Bolted
Double Angle
Welded
Duration
254 Man-hour
323 Man-hour

difference=
Where:
323254
x 10=2.14 say 2
323
Loosing Value=52=3
Table 4-35 Designer Rankings for Moment Connections (Built-up Section)

Bolted Flange Plate
Welded Flange Plate

Moment Connections
Criterion's
Importance
(scale of 0 to 5)
1. Economic (Cost)
2. Constructability
-1
35
21
Total =
In the final design rankings, the designers ranked economic as five (5) because the same in simple
connections it became the denominator of all constraints since the clients specified that the budget is to be
detected. In constructability, the numbers of joints in which the moment connections are applied are higher
than simple connections. Therefore the designers gave higher criterions importance ranked as four (4) than
the criterions importance of simple connections that ranked as two (2).
Economic (Cost).Based on the final design, welded flange plate obtained higher ranking since it gave lower
cost in total expenses of labor and materials than the cost of materials and labor in bolted
flange plate.
Constructability (Construction Duration).Simple shear connections are fewer than moment connections
since it is only applied for the intermediate beams of frames. Double angle bolted ranked
higher because it is easier to install than the double angle welded
Final Cost Estimate for Moment Connections (Welded Flange Plate and Bolted Flange Plate)
Tables 4-26 and 4-27 are the total cost estimates and installation of the moment connection which show the
difference between two trade-off processes. Using the model on trade-off strategies in engineering design
(Otto & Antonson, 1991), the designer followed the computations on how to rank the connections using
welded flange plate or bolted flange plate based on the constraints. Detailed estimate of cost and
installation is attached in Appendix O.
Table 4-36 Cost Estimate for Moment Connection (BFP)
Item
I.
II.
III.
IV.
A325 Bolts
Plate
Weld
crane rent
Material Cost
(per kg)
12,750 pcs Php 446,250.0
27,995 kg Php 1,242,978.0
238 kg
Php 14,280.0
Quantity
Labor Cost
(man-hr)
956 man-hr
448 man-hr
206 man-hr
144 per hr
total =
Total
Php 488,085.9
Php 1,262,574.5
Php 27,136.3
Php432,000.00
Php 2,209,796.7
Table 4-37 Cost Estimate for Moment Connection (WFP)

Item
I.
II.
II.
IV.
E70xx 1/8
Plate
A325 bolt
crane rent
Quantity
1410 kg
26,558 kg
1,750 pcs
Material Cost
(Per kg)
Php 84,599.4
Php 1,179,153.0
Php 52,325.0
Labor Cost
(man-hr)
3,428 man-hr
425 man-hr
131 man-hr
97 per hr
total =

Total
Php 298,824.4
Php 1,197,743.3
Php58,067.2
Php 291,000.0
Php 1,845,634.8

Where:
difference=
2,209,796.61,845,634.8
x 10=1.65 say 2
2,209,796.6
LoosingValue=52=3
Table 4-38 Duration of Construction for Moment Connection (WFP and BFP)
Type of Materials
Welded Flange
Plate
Bolted Flange
Plate
Duration
3984 Man-hour
1610 Man-hour

Where:
difference=
39841610
x 10=5.96 say 6
3984
Loosing Value=56=1
The discussions below explain how the designers came up with their criteria about the ability of the
construction method in the aspect of structural frame used.
1. Economic (Cost).The designer rankings are computed based on the trade-off strategies on the
engineering design (Otto &Antonsson, 1921). The rankings provided that the built-up sections are
more economical than the rolled sections since the designer can fabricate members to the exact
size needed and it occurs that the built-up produced lighter sections than the rolled sections
required.
In terms of ranking connections, bolted connections required materials that provided more
expenses than welding rods and this connection will not normally as strong as welded because of
reduction of area caused by drilling the holes. In terms of installation, welded connection requires
skilled welder that may cost high labor cost. These materials and labor costs are considered in
rankings of designers for both simple and moment connections.
2. Constructability (Duration of Construction).For both simple and moment connections, bolted
connections design obtained higher rating because comparatively, it offers ease of construction
and facilitates speed because of more automated materials for installation. While the rolled
sections considered as easier to construct since the designer will allocate more time in fabricating
the built-up sections than ordering rolled sections.
Ultimately, the cost factor is still the most essential consideration in the design of sections and for
both simple and moment connections. After the final design is considered, rankings did not
changed and it produced the same governing materials.
4.2.4. Influence of multiple constraints, trade-offs and standards in the Final Design
After performing the designs for the selected alternative tradeoffs to satisfy economic, constructability, and
environmental constraints, the designers are now able to decide which of these tradeoffs will be appropriate
as the final design choice. Based on economic constraints, the designers traded the cost of built-up and
rolled steel sections for all columns and beams framing while satisfying adequate structural design in terms
of drift to withstand against lateral loads such as seismic and gravity loads. For intermediate beams which
simple shear connections, double-angle welded or double-angle bolted are options for connections of
gravity resisting frames, adequate resistance were checked against shear capacity. For moment
connections of the frames, welded flange plate and bolted flange plate are alternatives for seismic-resisting
frames design which we checked against moment capacity.
For constructability, the designers determined the duration of installation and erection of the alternative
method of connections and check where we can save labor.
4.2.4.1 Column and Beam Sections

The designers presented two sections for frame of steel building. Rolled and built-up were compared as
columns and beams based on the relevant factors and constraints. Figure 4-49 shows the difference of
rolled and built-up sections. The variance of cost of rolled sections from built-up sections is worth Php
11,093,352.77. The use of built-up section gave lesser expenses than rolled as shown in this part.
Figure 4-63 Economical of sections
Another factor that influenced the final design is the manufacturability of the rolled and built-up sections.
Although the fabrication of section will not affect the duration of construction, it is also considered as a
factor that influenced the final design since the designers fabricate their own built-up section on site rather
than order rolled sections from the suppliers.
As shown in Figure 4-50, rolled sections have advantage from built-up sections with difference of
13,971man-hr since rolled sections are ready to use from the time it was delivered on site while built-up
sections needed time for its fabrication. This factor is also considered since it gave additional expenses in
fabrication of built-up section. At this moment, the designers choices are equal based on the economic and
manufacturability factors.
Figure 4-64 Manufacturability of sections
The last factor that the designers considered in the selection process of the columns and beams sections
for frame is the storey drift. Calculated storey drift using M shall not exceed 0.025 times the storey
height for the structures having a fundamental period of less than 0.7 sec. For structure having a
fundamental period of 0.7 or greater, the calculated storey drift shall not exceed 0.020 times the storey
height based on NSCP 2010 section 208.5.
The result of the analysis of lateral drift on X and Y axes revealed greater amount of displacement along Y
axis. Delineated values of storey drift along Y axis for rolled and built-up sections are shown in Figure 4-51.
This factor will help the designers for their final design choice of section to be used.
Figure 4-65Storey drift of sections along Y-axis

Final choice for steel sections
After considering the factors that influenced the final design choice, the designers came up with the use of
built-up sections because it is cheaper but longer in terms of fabrication. Entirely, built-up sections provided
lesser expenses on its total installation cost and more effective on resisting earthquake force as well.
4.2.4.2 Simple Shear Connections

The designers decided between double angle welded and double angle bolted that will be used as simple
shear connection for all simply supported beams. Upon making decisions, the designers also considered
factors that may affect the final design choice.
As shown in Figure 4-52 the results of the estimate of all the expenses for installation of simple shear
connections. This will show the difference of two alternative connections (DAW and DAB) for simply
supported beams based on economic constraints which came up with variance of Php61,410.84 in
advantage of double angle bolted.
Figure 4-66 Economical of simple shear connection

Figure 4-53 shows the difference of two trading connections based on time of their installation. Double
angle welded provided an installation process difference of 17man-hr from double angle bolted. Therefore,
DAW provided lesser cost but it will take longer installation than the DAB connections.
Figure 4-54 shows the difference in shear capacity of DAW and DAB connection with variance of 46.9 Kn.
4-67 Constructability
of simple
The maximum shear capacityFigure
of connections
are computed
using connections
derived stress formula, Stress = Force /
Area. Therefore, the double angle welded gave stronger capacity than that on the double angle bolted
connection.
Figure 4-68 Maximum shear capacity of simple connection

Final choice for simple shear connections
Overall, the designers chose double angle welded (DAW) for connections of simply supported beams since
it provided lesser cost than the double angle bolted even it gave longer time in installation. Also, DAW
allows larger shear capacity than the DAB connections had that means it is stronger than the DAB
connections.
4.2.4.3 Moment Connections

For the design choice of moment connections, the designers traded on welded flange plate and bolted
flange plate to be used for seismic-resisting frames. These are selected based on the factors that the
designers considered as relevant for the final design of moment connections.
These are analyzed after the estimated value of all the installation expenses. Figure 4-55 shows the
difference in cost of WFP and BFP. As seen in the chart, welded flange plate is more economical for about
Php 364,161.85 than bolted flange plate. Considering only this constraint, the designers can provide
economical moment connections.
Figure 4-69 Economical of moment connection

Figure 4-56 shows the duration of construction for both WFP and BFP. The installation provided a
difference of 2374man-hr in favor of bolted flange plate. Therefore, WFP is economical but it requires a lot
of time in installation compared to BFP.
The designers considered the moment capacity of both connections as another factor that influenced the
Figure 4-70 Constructability of moment connection
final design choice. With this factor, the designers are now able to select between WFP and BFP the most
appropriate moment connection for seismic-resisting frame.
Figure 4-57 shows the difference in capacity of moment connections. A variance of 19 Kn.m moment
capacities is provided in advantage of bolted flange plate. It means that the BFP produced larger capacity
than the WFP.
Figure 4-71 Moment capacity of moment connection
Final choice for moment connections

After considering the factors that influenced the final design choice for moment connections, the designers
came up with the use of bolted flange plate (BFP) since it provided ease of construction and greater
capacity than the welded flange plate (WFP).
Chapter 5 : Final Design

Final Design
The purpose of this capstone project is to design a mixed commercial and residential condominium building
aligned with the designers objectives and the used of strategic trade-off between alternative sections for
steel framing and connection design. Designing a structure that suits the needs of the client in accordance
with the codes and engineering standards was a great challenge for the designers. After the design was
performed, the task of examining the influence of multiple constraints, trade-offs and standards to decide
on the final choice even more gave the designers an informed knowledge and lifelong learning.
The designers learned to select the most appropriate materials for the construction of the building framing
system in terms of economic and constructability constraints. The choice between built-up and rolled
section produced a difference of Php11,096,352.73 in cost in favor of built-up section. The built-up section
also performed well in resisting lateral forces. For the connection of these members, strategic trade-off is
also performed. The use of double angle welded and double angle bolted connection for simply supported
beams came up with a difference of Php39,534.94 for cost and 46.9 kN for shear capacity. The same
process is performed for welded flange plate and bolted flange plate to be used for seismic-resisting
frames, a variance of 2374 man-hr in terms of constructability and 19 kN moment capacities are produced
and revealed that the use of built-up section must be implemented for the entire frame.
After considering the influence of multiple constraints, tradeoffs and standards, the designers have decided
on which of the tradeoffs will be appropriate for the final design. For columns and beams of the steel frame,
the use of built-up sections must be implemented entirely. For connections, applications of double angle
welded for simply supported beams and bolted flange plate for seismic-resisting frames must be
implemented. These governing tradeoffs provided the most appropriate design with accordance of the
design codes and standards of National Structural Code of the Philippines (2010). Final design schedules
are attached in Appendix A.
As a result, the objectives presented in chapter 1 are accomplished to satisfy the clients requirements. At
the same time, the use of this strategy trade-off will implement the most appropriate way in constructing the
structural frame based on multiple constraints. All parts of the steel building are designed in accordance
with the design codes and standards of National Structural Code of the Philippines (2010).
References
Association of Structural Engineers of the Philippines, I. (2004). Steel Handbook: Dimension and
Properties. philippines: ASEP.
Association of the Structural Engineers of the Philippines. (2010). National Structural Code of the
Philippines. Quezon City: Association of the Structural Engineers of the Philippines.
Bolduc, T. M., & Zona, J. (n.d.). A Tale of Two Project.
Carter, C. J., & Grubb, K. A. (n.d.). Prequalifies Seismic Moment Connection.
Center, A. U. (2009). Writing Lab Update, Paragraph Unity and Coherence.
Davison, B., & Owens, G. W. (2003). Steel Designers' Manual. Blackwell Publishing.
Otto, K. N., & Antonsson, E. K. (1991). Trade-off Strategies in Engineering Design. Researches in
Engineering Design, 3(2), 87 - 104.
Robles, C. (1995). National Building Code of the Philippines. Quezon City: Department of Public Works and
Highways.
Steel Deck Institute. (2003). Designing with Steel Form Deck. Illinois: Steel Deck Institute.
Appendices
Appendix A: Final Design Schedule
Appendix B: Initial Estimate of Sections and Connections
Appendix C: Codes and Standards
Appendix D: Manual Computations of Beam Members (Rolled Sections)
Appendix E: Manual Computations of Column Members (Rolled Sections)
Appendix F: Manual Computations of Simple Connection for Rolled Sections (DAB and
DAW)
Appendix G: Manual Computation of Moment Connections for Rolled Sections (BFP and
WFP)
Appendix H: Manual Computation of Beam Members (Built-up Sections)
Appendix I: Manual Computations of Column Members (Built-up Sections)
Appendix J: Manual Computations ofSimple Connection for Built-up Sections (DAW & DAB)
Appendix K: Manual Computations of Moment Connections for Built-up Sections (BFP &
WFP)
Appendix L: Final Estimate of Rolled Sections for the Entire Frame
Appendix M: Final Estimate of Built-up Sections for the Entire Frame
Appendix N: Final Estimate of Simple Connections (Rolled & Built-up Sections)
Appendix O: Final Estimate of Moment Connections (Rolled & Built-up Sections)
Appendix P: Manual Computation of Gravity Load Frame Connection
Appendix Q: Manual Computation of Base Plate
Appendix R: Manual Computation of Slab
Appendix S: Manual Computation of Footings
Appendix T: Manual Computations of Stair
Appendix U: Geotechnical Report
Appendix V: Working Schedule
Appendix W: Minutes of Meetings
Appendix X: STAAD Pro License

Capstone Design 10-19-13 FINAL PRESENT

Uploaded by

Document Information

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

Capstone Design 10-19-13 FINAL PRESENT

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Design of Mixed Commercial and Residential7-Storey Condominium

Technological Institute of the Philippines

Design of Mixed Commercial and Residential7-Storey Condominium.............................................................1

Appendix B: Initial Estimate of Sections and Connections.......................................................................119

Figure 4-22 Welded Flange Plate (WFP-1)....................................................................................................58

Table 4-25 Designer Rankings for Moment Connections (Built-up Section)..................................................90

Allowable Stress Design

Complete Joint Penetration

National Structural Code of the Philippines

Structural Analysis and Design

Chapter 1 : Project Background

1.2 Project Objectives

1.3 The Client

1.4 Project Scope and Limitations

1.5 Project Development

Figure 1-2 Steps of design project

Chapter 2 : Design Inputs

Figure 2-3 Framing plan of the 7-storey condominium

------Service & Passenger

Leisure, Retail &

Service & Passenger

Dwelling unit 8&

Provide space for water

Service & Passenger

Sides and elevation of the 7-Storey Condominium

Figure 2-4 Front elevation & rear elevation

Figure 2-5 Right side and left side elevation

Figure 2-6 Basement level for parking lot

Figure 2-7 Ground floor plan for commercial use

Figure 2-8 2nd to 7th floor plan for residential use

Figure 2-9 Roof deck plan

Figure 2-10 Occupancy plan for ground floor

Figure 2-11 Occupancy plan for 2nd to 7th floor

Figure 2-12 Framing plan for ground floor

Figure 2-13 Framing plan for 2nd to 7th floor

Chapter 3 : Constraints, Trade-offs and Standards

Figure 3-14 Ranking scale for percent difference

Table 3-2Designer Raw Rankings for Sections

Decision Criteria for

Initial Cost Estimate for Sections (Rolled and Built-up)

Table 3-3Initial Cost Estimate for Sections (Rolled and Built-up)

Computation of Ranking for Economic (cost):

(Higher Value Lower Value)

Table 3-4 Initial Duration of Construction for Sections (Built-up)

Computation of Ranking for Constructability (Fabrication):

Ability to Satisfy the Criterion

Computation of Ranking for Economic (cost):

(Higher Value Lower Value)

Computation of Ranking for Constructability:

Loosing Rank=55.3=0.31 say 1

Table 3-8 Designer Raw Rankings for Moment Connections

Decision Criteria for

Welded Flange Plate

Bolted Flange Plate

Computation of Ranking for Economic (cost):

Computation of Ranking for Constructability:

3.3 Design Standards

National Building Code of the Philippines

UBC 97, ASCE 7-05

3. Association of Structural Engineers of the Philippines (ASEP) Steel Handbook, 3 rd Edition,

Chapter 4 : Design of Structure

4.2 Structural Design

4.2.1 Design of structure using Rolled

Figure 4-16 Structural frame for Rolled Section