Design of Concrete

DESIGN OF A FIVE-STOREY DORMITORY BUILDING
1
Contents
DESIGN OF A FIVE-STOREY DORMITORY BUILDING .............................................................................. 1
Approval Sheet .............................................................................................. Error! Bookmark not defined.
CHAPTER 1: PROJECT BACKGROUND ..................................................................................................... 4
1.1. Project Description......................................................................................................................... 4
1.2. Project Location ............................................................................................................................. 6
1.3. Project Objectives .......................................................................................................................... 6
1.4. Project Client ................................................................................................................................. 7
1.5. Project Scope and Limitations ....................................................................................................... 7
1.6. Project Development ..................................................................................................................... 7
CHAPTER 2: DESIGN INPUTS ..................................................................................................................... 9
2.1. Description of the structure ............................................................................................................ 9
2.2 Related Literature .............................................................................................................................. 11
2.3 Architectural Plans ............................................................................................................................ 13
CHAPTER 3: DESIGN CONSTRAINTS, TRADE-OFFS, AND STANDARDS ............................................. 17
3.1. Design Constraints ...................................................................................................................... 17
3.2. Design Trade- offs ....................................................................................................................... 18
3.3. Designer’s Raw Ranking ............................................................................................................. 20
3.4. Design Standards ........................................................................................................................ 23
CHAPTER 4: DESIGN OF STRUCTURE .................................................................................................... 24
2
4.1. Design Methodology .................................................................................................................... 24
4.2. Design of Structure using Two-Way Slabs with Beams (Trade- off A) ......................................... 25
4.2.1. Geometric Modeling .................................................................................................................. 25
4.2.2. Material Properties .................................................................................................................... 26
4.2.3. Trial Dimension ......................................................................................................................... 27
4.2.4. Design Loads ............................................................................................................................ 27
4.2.5. Structural Analysis .................................................................................................................... 31
4.2.6. Summary of Staad Results ....................................................................................................... 35
4.2.7. Design of Structural Members (Two-Way Slab System with Beams) ........................................ 36
4.3. Design of Structure using Flat Plates (Trade- Off B) ........................................................................ 46
4.4. Validation of Trade- Offs .................................................................................................................. 60
4.5. Designer’s Final Ranking.................................................................................................................. 60
4.6. Designer’s Final Ranking Assessment ............................................................................................. 61
4.7. Influence of Multiple Constraints, Trade- Offs, and Standards in the Final Design........................... 62
4.7.1. Economic Comparison .............................................................................................................. 62
4.7.2. Safety Comparison.................................................................................................................... 63
4.7.3. Constructability Comparison ..................................................................................................... 63
CHAPTER 5: FINAL DESIGN ...................................................................................................................... 64
5.1. Beam Details and Schedule ............................................................................................................. 65
5.2. Column Details and Schedule .......................................................................................................... 66
5.3. Slab Details and Schedule ............................................................................................................... 69
APPENDICES ............................................................................................................................................. 70
Appendix A: Notations ............................................................................................................................. 70
Appendix B: Detailed Calculation for the Design of Structural Members ................................................. 72
Appendix C: Computation of Trade-Off 1 (Two-Way Slab with Beams) .................................................. 78
Appendix D: Computation of Trade-Off 2 (Flat Slab) ............................................................................. 104
Appendix E: Estimate of Trade-off 1...................................................................................................... 128
Appendix F: Estimate of Trade-off 2 ...................................................................................................... 138
3
CHAPTER 1: PROJECT BACKGROUND
1.1. Project Description
The Project is a 5-Storey Dormitory Building with elevator and roof deck situated at Brgy. Commonwealth
Quezon City. The number of students in Polytechnic University of the Philippines – Commonwealth is
increasing every year and many of the students are from far places so this structure will serve as a
dormitory building for the students of said school.
The dormitory building is rectangular in shape and has a gross area of 358 square meters and a floor area
of 335.2 square meters. The building is 36m x 9.5m with a 4.5m x 7m dimension per room. It has a floor to
floor distance of 3.2 meters and has a total height of 19.2 meters.
The material to be used for the structural members is reinforced concrete, and the designer presented
trade-offs to meet certain requirements which will be discussed in the succeeding chapters.
4
Figure 1-1. Perspective
5
1.2. Project Location
Figure 1-2. Project Location

1.3. Project Objectives
The objectives are divided into two parts: the Main Objective and Specific Objectives, as follows.
Main Objective:
 To design a structurally sound school building meeting the specifications provided by the
National Building Code, the National Structural Code, the Department of Education, and
the client.
Specific Objectives:
 To provide detailed plans based on the results of the trade-off analysis, with the final
design properly addressing the multiple constraints presented by the designer and the
specifications provided by the different codes.
 To provide the quantity estimate and the timetable for the construction of the project. Its
purpose is to provide a more detailed comparison between the two trade-offs when it
6
comes to cost and constructability, conforming to the design constraints and code
specifications.
1.4. Project Client
The owner of the project is Louise Jane D. David, a businesswoman who is planning to have a 5-
storey dormitory building located in Commonwealth Quezon City
1.5. Project Scope and Limitations
The project scope is composed of the following:

 Detailed architectural and structural design in accordance with the governing codes and
standards
 Creating the timetable for the project construction.
 Cost Estimate for the structural members of the structure, including equipment and labor
costs.
 Structural analysis using software
The project does not include the following:
 Design and cost estimate of electrical, plumbing, and sanitary works
 Design of Tie Beams and other foundation elements such as footings.
 Land Development and Construction Management of the project
1.6. Project Development
The completion of the project is achieved by observing the step-by-step process shown in Figure 3-
1. These steps are in general form and is made up of smaller items of activities.
The conceptualization and the making of the architectural plans and structural plans in accordance
with the site properties and the design codes. The next step is to determine the design trade-offs using the
constraints set by the owner. The structural analysis for each tradeoff is then made after providing the
necessary inputs. After that, the design forces were determined which will be used for the design of the
structural elements. Next is to evaluate the costs generated by the tradeoffs together with the other design
criterion. Next is to calculate the factor of safety generated by each trade-off to measure their resistance
against the applied loads. The final design will be made after deciding on the more feasible option between
the tradeoffs presented. This includes providing of the final details of the project.
7
START
CONCEPTUALIZATION &
DRAWING OF PLANS
IDENTIFICATION OF
DESIGN CONSTRAINTS
FORMULATION
OF DESIGN
TRADE-OFFS
TRADE-OFF 1 TRADE-OFF 2
COST COST
Figure 1-3. Flow Chart of the Project Processes
ESTIMATE ESTIMATE
ESTIMATION OF ESTIMATION OF
PROJECT DURATION PROJECT DURATION
FACTOR OF SAFETY FACTOR OF SAFETY

CALCULATION CALCULATION
SELECTION BETWEEN
TRADE-OFFS
FINAL DESIGN
END
8
CHAPTER 2: DESIGN INPUTS
2.1. Description of the structure
The dormitory building has a lot area of 358 square meters and a floor area of 335.2 square
meters. It has a dimension of 36m x 9.5m and a floor to floor height of 3.2 meters, having a total height of
19.13 meters. It consist of 6 rooms per floor and in the 2nd to 5th floor there are laundry and drying area and
a canteen on first floor. Stairways are provided at the right side of the building and an elevator is situated
near it. A machine room is located at the roof deck directly above the shaft to provide enough space for the
maintenance or repairs of the elevator. A fire exit is also provided, conforming to the standards of the
National Building Code.
The material to be used in all of the structural members is Reinforced Concrete, and the design
parameters of the members was based on the provisions given by the National Structural Code.
Room Description Function Area
6 Rooms from Gr. Floor to 5th Residential 31.5 m2

Dimensions: 4.5 x 7 m
Max. Capacity: 3 persons per
room
1 Room per Floor (2nd to 5th Laundry and Drying Area 22.5 m2
Floor )
Dimensions: 4.5 x 5 m
Max. Capacity: 5 persons
1 Room located in the Ground Canteen 22.5 m2

Floor
1 Room located in the Ground Guard Room 9 m2

Floor
1 Room Located at the Roof Machine Room 4.2 m2

Deck
Dimensions: 2.5 x 2.5 m
Capacity: 1-3 Persons
TOTAL AREA (excluding the area of Stairways, Open Area in the 89.7 m2
Roof Deck, Hallways and Elevators
Table 2-1. Room Classification with Floor Area
9
Room Function Quantity
Residential 30
Laundry and Drying Room 4
Canteen 1
Guard Room 1
Machine Room 1
TOTAL 37
Table 2-2. Room Function with corresponding Quantity
10
2.2 Related Literature
In today’s construction activity the use of flat slab is quite common which enhances the weight reduction,
speed up construction, and economical. Similarly from the beginning conventional slab has got place in
providing features like more stiffness, higher load carrying capacity, safe and economical also. As the
advancement era began practice of flat slab becomes quite common (Mohana H.S and Kavan M.R, 2015)
Two way slabs are slabs in which the surface load is transferred in two directions. Two way slabs have
many types: slabs supported on beams between all columns, slabs without beams and waffle slabs. Slabs
with beams are commonly used for high loads and or large spans. (Ibrahim Mohammad Arman, 2014)
Flat slabs without drops can be built faster because formwork is simplified and minimized. The overall
speed of construction will then be limited by the rate at which vertical elements can be cast. (British Cement
Association, 2001)
The timing of initiation of flat-slab subduction beneath southern Alaska and the upper plate record of this
process are not well understood. We explore the record of flat-slab subduction in southern Alaska by
integrating stratigraphic, provenance, geochronologic, and thermochronologic data from the region directly
above and around the perimeter of ongoing flat-slab subduction. (E. S. Finzel et al)
(U.Gupta et.al, 2012) Studies about flat slab building structures which are more significantly flexible than
traditional concrete frame/wall or frame structures, thus becoming more vulnerable to seismic loading.
Therefore, the characteristics of the seismic behavior of flat slab buildings suggest that additional measures
for guiding the conception and design of these structures in seismic regions are needed.
(U.Gupta et.al, 2012)To improve the performance of building having flat slabs under seismic loading,
provision of part shear walls is proposed in the present work. The object of the this work is to compare the
behavior of multi-storey buildings having flat slabs with drops to the two way slabs with beams and to study
the effect of part shear walls on the performance of these two types of buildings under seismic forces. This
work provides a good source of information on the parameters lateral displacement and storey drift.
(R.K.Makode et.al) discussed about the flat slab buildings in which slab is directly rested on columns, have
been adopted in many buildings constructed recently due to the advantage of reduced floor to floor heights
to meet the economical and architectural demands.
(T.Srikanth et.al, 1999) studies their response under seismic conditions and to evaluate seismic retrofit
schemes. Two-dimensional nonlinear push-over analysis is carried out on a typical flat slab building. The
building considered is designed only for gravity loads and wind loads. Comparison with similar conventional
beam-column frames shows that the flat slab buildings have low lateral stiffness, low drift capacity and
have hardly any ductility, while the over strength is of similar order.
(Widianto et.al) perform experimental research on 2/3-scale slab-column connections was conducted to
quantify the effects of earthquake-damage and low reinforcement ratios on the punching shear strength,
and to study the efficiency of various rehabilitation techniques
11
(K.S.Sable et.al, 2012) focuses on tall commercial buildings are primarily a response to the demand by
business activities to be as close to each other, and to the city centre as possible, thereby putting intense
pressure on the available land space. Structures with a large degree of indeterminacy is superior to one
with less indeterminacy, because of more members are monolithically connected to each other and if
yielding takes place in any one of them, then a redistribution of forces takes place. Therefore it is necessary
to analyze seismic behavior of building for different heights to see what changes are going to occur if the
height of conventional building and flat slab building changes.
Citation
International Research Journal of Engineering and Technology (IRJET)
British Cement Association, 2001
Gupta,U., Ratnaparkhe ,S., Gome,P.,“Seismic behavior of building having flat slabs with Drops”,
International Journal of Emerging Technology and Advanced Engineering Volume 2, Issue 10, October
2012.
Makode, K.R., Akhtar, S., Batham, G.,“Dynamic analysis of multistory rcc building frame With flat slab and
grid slab”, al Int. Journal of Engineering Research and Applications, Vol. 4, Issue 2(Version 1), February
2014, pp.416-420.
Srikanth, T., “Nonlinear push-over analysis of flat slab buildings with and without Seismic retrofitting” 1999
Widianto, Tian, Y., Argudo, J., Bayrak, O., Jirsa, J.O., “Rehabilitation of earthquake-Damaged reinforced
concrete flat plat slab column connections for two way shear”, Proceedings of the 8th U.S.National
Conference on Earthquake Engineering, April 18-22,
Sable,K.S., Ghodechor, V.A., B., Kandekar, S.B., “Comparative Study of Seismic Behavior of multistory flat
slab and conventional reinforced concrete framed structures”, International Journal of Computer
Technology and Electronics Engineering, Volume 2, Issue 3, June 2012.
12
2.3 Architectural Plans
Figure 2-1. Ground Floor Plan
13
Figure 2-2. 2nd – 5th Floor Plan
Figure 2-1.Roof Deck Plan
14
Figure 2-4. Front Elevation
15
Figure 2-5. Rear Elevation
16
CHAPTER 3: DESIGN CONSTRAINTS, TRADE-OFFS, AND STANDARDS
3.1. Design Constraints
A constraint is a condition which hampers something. Therefore in this project, the design
constraint is defined as a restrictive condition that limits the performance of a system in a given context.
The consideration of constraints in a design is very essential in the planning and development of a project,
for it describes the association between entities and methods. One advantage is that, the restrictive impact
of a constraint can be reduced or even eliminated.
The following were the design constraints that were deliberated to have an effect in the
conceptualization and actualization of the project. These must be carefully evaluated in each trade- offs.
Constraints:
1. Economical (Cost) – In order to achieve maximum efficiency in the construction process and to
ensure satisfaction from the client, the designer must consider the costs as well as the effective
cash flow throughout the duration of the project. Thus, the designer must carefully choose between
the Two-way slab with beams and Flat slab, and weigh on which of them will generate lesser costs.
2. Safety (Deflection) - The designer must study the safety of the structure. Two-way slab with beams
and Flat slab will cause change in the structural arrangements of the building and for that, the
safety must be measured by getting the factor of safety for each trade- offs. And the designer must
weigh on which structure will be safer based on the results.
3. Constructability (Duration of Construction) – The designer must carefully consider the duration of
construction per trade- off as there will be a limited amount of time in the building of the project as
noted by the client. And also the client wants to finish the project as soon as possible before the
school year starts.
Immeasurable Constraints
1. Aesthetics (Appearance) - The designer must consider the finished look provided by the trade- offs,
to guarantee the comfort and satisfaction of the student who will use the dormitory building and
also the client wants it to look good.
2. Environmental (Pollution) – The designer must consider the environmental aspect provided by the
tradeoff to ensure the health of the people around the project. Since it is near in the school and
residential area the designer must consider the effect of the construction in the environment. Thus,
the designer must carefully choose between the Two-way slab with beams and Flat slab based on
the pollution they will generate.
17
3.2. Design Trade- offs
For the trade- off, the designer focused on the slab system of the structure as the subject and he
must carefully weigh- in between these two methodologies in order to comply with the multiple constraints
listed in the previous sections.
3.2.1. Two-Way Slab with Beams (Conventional slab system)
In the conventional slab system, slabs were supported by beams at their respective edges, thus
increasing the overall resistance of the structure to bigger loads and stresses. This system is preferred
when its cost is less than the costs of flat slabs or flat plates due to high loads and if there are wide beam
spans.
Figure 3-1. Two- Way Slab with beams

(McCormac, 2014, p. 494)
Advantages:
 Versatility
 High resistance to different types of loads and deflections
 Slabs with minimum thickness may be permitted
Disadvantages:
 Higher formwork costs
 More complicated installation of reinforcements
18
3.2.2. Flat Slab
In the modern day construction, the flat plate system is the widely used method when it comes to
the construction of slabs. In this system, the slabs transfer its load directly to the columns without the aid of
beams. Flat plate system places transfer the loads directly to the vertical membranes without the aid of
drop panels/ column capitals. Flat slabs use drop panels/ column capitals/ both to provide shear resistance
near the columns,
Figure 3-2. Flat Plate

(McCormac, 2014, p. 493)
Advantages:
 Easier and cheaper formwork installation
 Flexibility in room layout
 Building height can be reduced
Disadvantages:
 Span length is medium
 Critical middle strip deflection
 Higher slab thickness
These trade-offs were generated to address the constraints presented in Section 3.1. The designer chose
the slab as the structural member to be modified for the design because of the following reasons:
1. Slab is one of the costliest structural member due to the complex arrangement of reinforcing bars,
and the huge volume it occupies in the whole structure.
2. Slabs greatly affect the interior layout of rooms in a structure.
19
To provide the proper analysis and comparison between the trades-offs presented based on the design
constraints, the designer used the model on trade-off strategies in engineering design by Otto and
Antonsson (1991). In this model the importance of each criterion (on a scale of 0 to 5, 5 with the highest
importance) was assigned and each design methodology’s ability to satisfy the criterion (on a scale from -5
to 5, 5 with the highest ability to satisfy the criterion) was likewise tabulated.
Computation of ranking for ability to satisfy criterion of materials:

𝑯𝒊𝒈𝒉𝒆𝒓𝒗𝒂𝒍𝒖𝒆−𝑳𝒐𝒘𝒆𝒓𝒗𝒂𝒍𝒖𝒆
% 𝑫𝒊𝒇𝒇𝒆𝒓𝒆𝒏𝒄𝒆 = 𝒙𝟏𝟎
𝑳𝒐𝒘𝒆𝒓𝒗𝒂𝒍𝒖𝒆
𝑺𝒖𝒃𝒐𝒓𝒅𝒊𝒏𝒂𝒕𝒆𝒓𝒂𝒏𝒌 = 𝑮𝒐𝒗𝒆𝒓𝒏𝒊𝒏𝒈𝒓𝒂𝒏𝒌 − (% 𝒅𝒊𝒇𝒇𝒆𝒓𝒆𝒏𝒄𝒆)𝒙𝟏𝟎
In order to come up with values on ranking, the designer assigned a desired value to the governing rank
not exceeding to the value of 5 which will respond to the assigned importance factor of the given
constraints. The subordinate rank is the rank of the trade-offs which gives a lower value. The difference
between the governing rank and subordinate rank corresponds to the percentage distance along the
ranking scale below.
3.3. Designer’s Raw Ranking
After considering the design constraints, the designer came up with the raw rankings on the two
tradeoffs presented. The discussion on how the designer came up with the raw rankings value were shown
and computed in the succeeding portions.
Criterion’s Importance Ability to satisfy the criterion

(on a scale from -5 to 5)
Decision Criteria
(on a scale of 0 to 5) Two- Way Slab w/
Flat Plate
Beams
1. Economic 5 3 4
2. Safety 5 5 2
3. Constructability 3 3 4
Over-all Rank 49 42
20
3.3.1. Tradeoff Assessment
The importance of each criterion were subjective and were based on the initial perception of the
designer. The cost was given an importance value of five (5) because the client wants these project to have
a lesser amount of money cost. Safety was given also and importance value of five (5) because the stability
of the resulting structure against all types of loadings will always be the utmost priority, knowing that lots of
people will be using the building when its built. And lastly constructability was given a value of (3) although
the client wants to finish the structure before the school year start the designer thinks the project will finish
on time.
3.3.1.1. Economic Assessment
For the initial assessment, the designer believed that the flat plate system will cost cheaper than
the two-way slab with beams system because by initial inspection of the building layout, the number of
interior beams were quite many, thus, formworks that will be used for the construction will generate greater
costs compared to the number of formworks that will be used for the flat plate system. Aside from the
formworks, because of the additional beams that will be built, the number of reinforcing bars and volume
will also increase, and the designer believed that the cost for these additional structural members will cost
more compared to the construction of flat slabs system.
3.3.1.2. Safety Assessment
When it comes to safety, the two-way slab system with beams was believed to be resistant to
bigger loads because the addition of interior beams results to higher rigidity of the structure against
different loads such as seismic and wind loads. Flat plates are also subjected to greater middle strip
deflections, although such deflections theoretically will not affect that much when it comes to the strength of
the structure, seeing such things typically make someone feel unsafe being inside such structure, which
may also affect the perception of the occupants of the building about the integrity of the structure.
3.3.1.3. Constructability Assessment
For the constructability assessment, the flat plate system require less construction time because of
the absence of interior beams. The addition of interior beams will require additional time for the placing of
formworks and arrangement of reinforcing steel.
21
3.3.2. Initial Estimate (Economical)
For the initial cost estimate, a consultant was hired to do the rough estimation for each trade-offs.
The results of which are the following:
Two- Way Slab with Beams Flat Slabs
10,000,000 Php 8,500,000 Php
This estimate provides an initial value on how will each trade-off assess the given criteria.
Thus,
𝟏𝟎, 𝟎𝟎𝟎, 𝟎𝟎𝟎 − 𝟖, 𝟓𝟎𝟎, 𝟎𝟎𝟎
𝑫𝒊𝒇𝒇𝒆𝒓𝒆𝒏𝒄𝒆 = ( ) 𝐱 𝟏𝟎 = 𝟏. 𝟓
𝟏𝟎, 𝟎𝟎𝟎, 𝟎𝟎𝟎
Giving the second trade off 4 points and first trade-off is equal to 4 – 1.5 = 2.5 say 3
3.3.3. Initial Estimate (Safety)
The safety is based upon the deflection of the structure since the first trade off which is Two-Way
Slab with Beams has a lower deflection than the second trade off which is the Flat slab because
the first trade-off has a beam who will support and lessen the deflection. The designer assumed
3.5mm deflection for trade-off 1 and 5mm deflection on trade-off 2
Deflection
Two- Way Slab with Beams Flat Plates
3.5mm 5mm
Thus,
𝟓 − 𝟑. 𝟓
𝑫𝒊𝒇𝒇𝒆𝒓𝒆𝒏𝒄𝒆 = ( ) 𝐱 𝟏𝟎 = 𝟑
𝟓
Giving the first trade off 5 points and first trade-off is equal to 5 – 3 = 2
22
3.3.3. Initial Estimate (Constructability)
Duration of the project calculated per volume of the beam. The beam is the only member
considered because other structures’ volume is constant. In this initial duration the volume of
concrete is analyzed only. The time it takes per volume of concrete is assumed to be two hours.
The table below shows the duration per volume.
Man hours
Two- Way Slab with Beams Flat Plates
8,500 hours 7,200 hours
Thus,
𝟖, 𝟓𝟎𝟎 − 𝟕, 𝟐𝟎𝟎
𝑫𝒊𝒇𝒇𝒆𝒓𝒆𝒏𝒄𝒆 = ( ) 𝐱 𝟏𝟎 = 𝟏. 𝟓
𝟖, 𝟓𝟎𝟎
Giving the second trade off 4 points and second trade-off is equal to 4 – 1.5 = 2.5 say 3
3.4. Design Standards
The designer came up with the design of the 5-Storey Dormitory Building with accordance to the
following codes and standards:
1. National Building Code of the Philippines (NBCP)
2. National Structural Code of the Philippines (NSCP) vol. 1-2010 edition (PD1096)
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.
The National Structural Code of the Philippines 2010.
This code provides minimum standards to safeguard life or limb, property and public welfare by
regulating and controlling the design, construction, quality of materials pertaining to the structural
aspects of all buildings and structures within its jurisdiction. The provision of this code shall apply to the
construction, alteration, moving, demolition, repair, maintenance and use of any building or structure
within its jurisdiction, except work located primarily in a public way, public utility towers and poles,
hydraulic flood control structures, and indigenous family dwellings.
23
CHAPTER 4: DESIGN OF STRUCTURE
4.1. Design Methodology
The five-story commercial building’s slabs, beams, and columns was designed by ultimate design
method (USD) since the entire structure will be made of reinforced concrete as specified by the client. The
design methodology of the entire structure will be based from the latest codes and standard in NSCP 2010.
DESIGN SPECIFICATION
GEOMETRIC MODELLING
MATERIAL PROPERTIES
LOAD SCHEDULE
STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS
DESIGN LOADS
DEISGN OF STRUCTURAL MEMBERS
DESIGN OF BEAMS DESIGN OF SLAB DESIGN OF COLUMN
BEAM SCHEDULING SLAB SCHEDULING COLUMN SCHEDULING
The designing of Figure 4-1. Design Methodology structural members
24
for each trade-off followed a fixed procedure as shown in Figure 4-1. Since the main structural members
will be built using reinforced concrete, the procedure for the design must be made using the Ultimate Stress
Design Method (USD) found in Chapter 4 of the National Structural Code of the Philippines. The structural
modeling and analysis was done with the aid of Bentley Staad Pro. V8i.
After complying with the design specifications provided by the several standards and codes
presented, the plans for the structural model of the structure was made and the geometric model of the
structure was created using Staad Pro. V8i. After modelling the structure, each member was given the
necessary properties. Each member was designed using Reinforced Concrete as its material and a trial
section was used to calculate for the resulting loads which will be used for the design of each structural
members, namely: Beams, Slabs, and Columns. After getting the final design of each elements, scheduling
was made to tabulate the quantity of materials which will be used later on for the comparison of the two
trade-offs presented.
4.2. Design of Structure using Two-Way Slabs with Beams (Trade- off A)
In this section, the designer presented the structural models for each trade-off. The framing plan were
generated using AutoCAD and others were generated using Staad.
4.2.1. Geometric Modeling
Figure 4-2.Typical Framing Plan for Trade-Off A
25
Figure 4-3. 3D Modeling using STAAD. Pro v8i
4.2.2. Material Properties
Table 4-1.Material Properties set by STAAD. Pro v8i for Reinforced Concrete
The material properties used by STAAD. Pro.v8i were specified in Table below.
26
4.2.3. Trial Dimension
The trial dimension of each structural members used by the designer for the analysis were listed in
Table 4-2 shown below.
Structural Element Dimensions
Beams 300 x 400 mm
Columns 400 x 400 mm
Slabs 150 mm
Table 4-2. Trial Dimension

4.2.4. Design Loads
Aside from the self-weight of the structural members, the following were the other gravity loads
applied to the structure using Staad. Pro. V8i:
Floor Level Load Characteristics Load Category Value
2nd Floor – Roof Exterior Wall 150mm Dead Load 9.952 KN/m
Deck CHB w/ Plaster on
Both Sides and Grout
@ Full Height
2nd Floor – Roof Interior Wall Dead Load 9.952 KN/ m
Deck 150mm CHB w/
Plaster on Both Sides
and Grout @ Full
Height
Roof Deck Elevator Weight Dead Load 2.7468 KN/m
2nd Floor- Roof Stair Weight Dead Load 14.1887 KN/m
Deck
2nd Floor – Roof Floor and Ceiling Super Imposed 2.68 KPa
Deck Finishes Dead Load
(SDL)
2nd Floor- 5th Floor Balcony Wall 1 m Dead Load 3.11 KN/ m
150 mm CHB w/
and Grout
Roof Deck Parapet Wall 1.2 m Dead Load 3.732 KN/m
150 mm CHB w/
and Grout
Table 4-3.Gravity Loads
27
4.2.4.1 Earthquake Load
Every structure situated in the ground will always be subjected to earthquake forces. Especially in
the Philippines, where earthquake is frequent. That’s why for every structural design, seismic loads must be
considered.
Section 208 of NSCP has the general guide on defining earthquake
Parameter Value
Zone 0.4
Importance Factor 1
Rw in X Direction (RWX) 8.5
Rw in Z Direction (RWZ) 8.5
Soil Profile Type (STYP) 4
Near Source Factor (Na) 1.12
Near Source Factor (Nv) 1.45
Table 4-4. Seismic Parameters

The site was situated at Brgy. Commonwealth Quezon City. Quezon City was located within Zone
4 in the Philippine Seismic Map. The distance of the location to the nearest fault line was calculated to be
7.61 m, therefore the values obtained for the Near Source Factors (Na) & (Nv) were found to be 1.12 and
1.45 respectively. The Soil Profile type was found to be Sd as the soil in the location was stiff. The structure
has a seismic importance factor (Ip) of 1.00.
4.2.4.2 Live Load
The building will be used for residential purposes; thus, Section 205 of NSCP 2010 provided that
slabs will carry a minimum uniform live load of 1.9kPa.
4.2.4.3 Wind Load
The wind load parameters used for the design came from Section 207 of the NSCP 2010. These
parameters were also found in the ASCE-7 2010 when using Staad.Pro.v8i. The location of the site falls
under Zone 2 of the Wind Zone Map of the Philippines. The Basic Wind Speed for Zone 2 is 200 kph. The
Exposure type of the site is under Type B for the project location is surrounded with other structures (Urban
Area). The Building is classified as Type III and is also classified as Partially Enclosed due to the openings
in the balcony.
28
Parameter Value
Basic Wind Speed 200 kph
Exposure Category Type B
Building Classification Category Type III
Structure Type Building Structure
Enclosure Classification Partially Enclosed
Building Height 19.2 m
Building Dimension 36 x 9.5 m
Table 4-5. Wind Load Parameters
4.2.4.4 Primary Loads and Load Combinations
After primary loads was defined, STAAD Pro could automatically generate load combinations which were
with same reference as NSCP 2010.
PRIMARY LOAD CASES

Number Name Type
1 EQ AT X Seismic
2 EQ AT Z Seismic
3 WINDWARD X Wind
4 WINDWARD Z Wind
5 LEEWARD X Wind
6 LEEWARD Z Wind
7 DL Dead
8 LL Live
Table 4-6.Primary Load Cases
The load combinations presented were based on Section 409.3.1 of the National Structural Code of the
Philippines (2010 Edition). The effect of each load combinations acting simultaneously in the structure were
investigated using Staad. Pro v8i.
29
COMBINATION LOAD CASES
Number Combination L/C name Primary Primary L/C Name Factor
7 DL 1.2
9 COMBINATION LOAD CASE 9
8 LL 1.6
7 DL 1.2
3 WINDWARD X 0.8
7 DL 1.2
4 WINDWARD Z 0.8
7 DL 1.2
5 LEEWARD X 0.8
7 DL 1.2
13 COMBINATION LOAD CASE 13 3 WINDWARD X 1.6
8 LL 1
7 DL 1.2
14 COMBINATION LOAD CASE 14 4 WINDWARD Z 1.6
8 LL 1
7 DL 1.2
15 COMBINATION LOAD CASE 15 5 LEEWARD X 1.6
8 LL 1
7 DL 1.2
16 COMBINATION LOAD CASE 16 6 LEEWARD Z 1.6
8 LL 1
7 DL 1.2
17 COMBINATION LOAD CASE 17 1 EQ AT X 1
8 LL 1
7 DL 1.2
18 COMBINATION LOAD CASE 18 2 EQ AT Z 1
8 LL 1
7 DL 0.9
3 WINDWARD X 1.6
7 DL 0.9
4 WINDWARD Z 1.6
7 DL 0.9
5 LEEWARD X 1.6
7 DL 0.9
6 LEEWARD Z 1.6
7 DL 0.9
1 EQ AT X 1
7 DL 0.9
2 EQ AT Z 1
7 DL 1.2
6 LEEWARD Z 0.8
Table 4-7. Load Combinations
30
4.2.5. Structural Analysis
After modeling the structure and applying the necessary data into the Staad. Pro v8i interface, the structural
analysis was performed. The loading results were shown in the following sections.
4.2.5.1 Primary Loadings
Figure 4-4. Dead Load
31
Figure 4-5. Live Load
Figure 4-6. Earthquake Load at X
32
Figure 4-7. Earthquake Load at Z
Figure 4-8. Wind Load at Windward X
33
Figure 4-9. Wind Load at Windward Z
Figure 4-10. Wind Load at Leeward X
34
Figure 4-11. Wind Load at Leeward Z
4.2.6. Summary of Staad Results
After analyzing the structure using STAAD. Pro v8i based on the load cases applied, the following
were the Loads and Moments to be resisted by the structure. These loads were used for the design of the
structural members.
4.2.6.1. Beams
Max. Negative Max. Positive Max. Axial Load Max. Shear Max. Torsion
Moment Moment
248.615 KN-m 201.630 KN-m 55.571 KN 246.615 KN 44.278 KN-m
Table 4-8. Resulting Loads for Beams
4.2.6.2. Columns
Max. Axial Load (Fx) Moment at Y (My) Moment at Z (Mz)

2036.648 KN -70.372 KN-m 0.26 KN-m
35
Table 4-9. Resulting Loads for Columns
4.2.6.3. Slabs
Since the design for slabs using USD requires the loadings to be linearly distributed (KN/m), the
designer used the dead loads and live loads carried by the slabs.
Dead Load Live Load
2.68 KPa 3.8 KPa
Table 4-10. Resulting Loads for Slabs
4.2.7. Design of Structural Members (Two-Way Slab System with Beams)
The designer provided a simplified chart of design flow for each structural member. Computation
was based on formulas provided by NSCP 2010. Flexural and axial member was designed in accordance
to Section 410 of NSCP 2010, shear reinforcements was designed in accordance to Section 411 of NSCP
2010, two-way slab system was designed in accordance to Section 413 of NSCP 2010, strength and
serviceability requirements was checked using Section 409 of NSCP 2010, and general considerations was
mentioned in Section 408 of NSCP.
36
4.2.7.1. Design of Beams
DESIGN OF BEAM
Determine maximum and minimum steel percentage
Assume steel percentage in between maximum and minimum
Compute omega, then compute for the moment capacity
Check if moment capacity is greater than factored moment
Determine required steel area, then determine actual steel area
Check if the tension steel will yield and meet required strain
Determine required spacing of stirrups for shear
Figure 4-12. Flowchart for the design of beams
37
4.2.7.1.1. Sample Beam Schedule for Trade- Off A
Using the governing codes and standards in the designing of beams, the designer came up with
the resulting schedule which will be used for all of the typical beams in the structure (except for the stair
beams which require a bigger depth for the connection of the stair landings) . Spacing of stirrups will differ
per beam length and will be shown in Chapter 5.
Stream of light Steel Reinforcements Bar

dimensions END SPAN MID SPAN diameter
b (mm) t (mm) top bot top bot
300 400 2 7 2 5 25
Table 4-11. Typical Beam Section for Trade-Off A
38
4.2.7.2. Design of Columns
DESIGN OFCOLUMN
Determine eccnetricity both in x and z direction
Assume a column section with steel reinforcing between maximum and minimum
Determine e balance, P balance and M balance
Determine from the eccentricity if compression controls or tension controls
If compression controls, Assume tension steel will not yield.

If tension controls, Assume tension steel will yield
Use trial and error method in finding "c"
Compute for P capacity and compare with given Pu
Select spacing of ties
Figure 4-13 Flowchart for Column Design
39
4.2.7.2.1. Sample Column Schedule for Tradeoff A
Using the governing codes and standards in the designing of beams, the designer came up with
the resulting schedule which will be used for all of the typical columns in the structure. Tie spacing and
other details will be shown in Chapter 5
Column DIMENSIONS COLUMN BAR No. of bars

type B (mm) T (mm) HEIGHT DIAMETER
Corner 350 350 17.2 m 32 mm 12
Interior 350 350 17.2 m 25 mm 12
and
Edge
Table 4-12. Typical Column Section for Trade-Off A4.2.6.3. Design of Flat Plates using Direct Design
Method
40
4.2.7.3. Design of Slabs
41
42
Figure 4-14. Flowchart for Slab Design
4.2.7.3.1. Sample Slab Schedule for Tradeoff A
Using the governing codes and standards, the designer came up with the resulting schedule which will be
used for all of the typical slabs in the structure.
INTERIOR PANELS
LABEL BAR DIAMETER LONGER SPAN SHORTER SPAN THICKNESS
S-1 12 mm 4.5 m 3.5 m 125 mm
COLUMN STRIPS
SHORT STRIP BARS (M-) SHORT STRIP BARS (M+) LONG STRIP BARS (M-) LONG STRIP BARS (M+)
20 pcs @ 225 mm O.C. 10 pcs @ 225 mm O.C. 16 pcs @ 250 mm O.C. 8 pcs @ 250 mm O.C.
MIDDLE STRIPS
14 pcs @ 125 mm O.C. 5 pcs @ 225 mm O.C. 12pcs @ 150 mm O.C. 4 pcs @ 250 mm O.C.
Table 4-13 (a)
EDGE BEAMS ( LONGER SIDE DISCONTINUOUS)

S-1 12 mm 4.5 m 3.5 m 125 mm
COLUMN STRIPS
MIDDLE STRIPS
SHORT STRIP BARS EDGE (M-) SHORT STRIP BARS INTERIOR (M-) SHORT STRIP BARS (M+) LONG STRIP BARS (M-) LONG STRIP BARS (M+)
5 pcs @ 225 mm O.C. 7 pcs @ 125 mm O.C. 6 pcs @ 150 mm O.C. 18 pcs @ 100 mm O.C. 5 pcs @ 200 mm O.C.

S-2 12 mm 4.5 m 2.5 m 125 mm
COLUMN STRIPS
MIDDLE STRIPS
Table 4-13 b.
43
44
EDGE BEAMS ( SHORTER SIDE DISCONTINUOUS)
S-1 12 mm 4.5 m 3.5 m 125 mm
COLUMN STRIPS
MIDDLE STRIPS
SHORT STRIP BARS (M-) SHORT STRIP BARS (M+) LONG STRIP BARS EDGE (M-) LONG STRIP BARS INT (M-) LONG STRIP BARS (M+)

S-5 12 mm 2.25 m 2.25 m 125 mm
COLUMN STRIPS
MIDDLE STRIPS
CORNER PANEL
S-1 12 mm 4.5 m 3.5 m 125 mm
COLUMN STRIPS
MIDDLE STRIP
SHORT STRIP BARS EDGE (M-) SHORT STRIP BARS INTERIOR (M-) SHORT STRIP BARS (M+) LONG STRIP BARS EDGE (M-) LONG STRIP BARS INT (M-) LONG STRIP BARS (M+)
5 pcs @ 225 mm O.C. 11 pcs @ 75 mm O.C 9 pcs @ 100 mm O.C. 4 pcs @ 250 mm O.C. 10 pcs @ 100 mm O.C. 8 pcs @ 125 mm O.C.

S-2 12 mm 4.5 m 2.5 m 125 mm
COLUMN STRIPS
MIDDLE STRIP

S-3 12 mm 4.75 m 4.5 m 125 mm
COLUMN STRIPS
MIDDLE STRIP

S-4 12 mm 4.5 m 3.5 m 125 mm
COLUMN STRIPS
MIDDLE STRIP
Table 4-13 a-c. Schedule of Typical Slabs for Trade-Off A
45
4.3. Design of Structure using Flat Plates (Trade- Off B)
The slabs will be design conventionally as two-way with assumed thickness of 150mm. The method
adapted was Direct Design Method as prescribed on Section 413.7 of NSCP. Due to symmetry, only three
slabs were considered in the design; the corner, the long edge and the short edge slab. Interior slab was
specifically omitted to lessen the complexity of work and to have a sufficient opening for access stairs and
elevator at the centre of the building.
Beams were designed using the largest moment generated by STAAD Pro from all possible load cases.
For the purpose of simplification, only two beams were considered and designed; beams parallel to x-axis
and beams parallel to z-axis. Beam was assumed to have a dimension of 300x400mm throughout the
structure.
Columns with assumed dimension of 400x400mm were designed based from the reaction of the beam and
slab it carried in exterior, interior and corner spans. Maximum axial force used was determined through the
use of STAAD Pro. Due to symmetry of columns’ tributary areas, four types of columns were designed, the
corner columns, the long edge columns, the short edge columns, and the interior columns.
4.3.1. Geometric Modeling
Figure 4-15 Typical Floor Framing Plan for Trade- Off B
46
Figure 4- 16. 3D Modeling of the Structure using STAAD. Pro v8i
4.3.2. Material Properties
The material properties used by STAAD. Pro.v8i were specified in Table below.
Table 4-14.Material Properties set by STAAD. Pro v8i for Reinforced Concrete
47
4.3.3. Trial Dimension
The trial dimension of each structural members used by the designer for the analysis were listed in Table 4-
2 shown below.
Structural Element Dimensions
Beams 300 x 400 mm
Columns 400 x 400 mm
Slabs 150 mm
Table 4-15. Trial Dimension
4.3.4. Design Loads

Aside from the self-weight of the structural members, the following were the other gravity loads
applied to the structure using Staad. Pro. V8i:
Floor Level Load Characteristics Load Category Value
2nd Floor – Roof Exterior Wall 150mm Dead Load 9.952 KN/m
Deck CHB w/ Plaster on
Both Sides and Grout
@ Full Height
2nd Floor – Roof Interior Wall Dead Load 9.952 KN/ m
Deck 150mm CHB w/
and Grout @ Full
Height
Roof Deck Elevator Weight Dead Load 2.7468 KN/m
2nd Floor- Roof Stair Weight Dead Load 14.1887 KN/m
Deck
2nd Floor – Roof Floor and Ceiling Super Imposed 2.68 KPa
Deck Finishes Dead Load
(SDL)
2nd Floor- 5th Floor Balcony Wall 1 m Dead Load 3.11 KN/ m
150 mm CHB w/
and Grout
Roof Deck Parapet Wall 1.2 m Dead Load 3.732 KN/m
150 mm CHB w/
and Grout
Table 4-16.Gravity Loads
48
4.3.4.1 Earthquake Load
Every structure situated in the ground will always be subjected to earthquake forces. Especially in
the Philippines, where earthquake is frequent. That’s why for every structural design, seismic loads must be
considered.
Section 208 of NSCP has the general guide on defining earthquake
Parameter Value
Zone 0.4
Importance Factor 1
Rw in X Direction (RWX) 8.5
Rw in Z Direction (RWZ) 8.5
Soil Profile Type (STYP) 4
Near Source Factor (Na) 1.12
Near Source Factor (Nv) 1.45
Table 4-17. Seismic Parameters

The site was situated at Brgy. Commonwealth Quezon City. Quezon City was located within Zone
4 in the Philippine Seismic Map. The distance of the location to the nearest fault line was calculated to be
7.61 m, therefore the values obtained for the Near Source Factors (Na) & (Nv) were found to be 1.12 and
1.45 respectively. The Soil Profile type was found to be Sd as the soil in the location was stiff. The structure
has a seismic importance factor (Ip) of 1.00.
4.3.4.2 Live Load
The building will be used for residential purposes; thus, Section 205 of NSCP 2010 provided that
slabs will carry a minimum uniform live load of 1.9kPa.
4.3.4.3 Wind Load
The wind load parameters used for the design came from Section 207 of the NSCP 2010. These
parameters were also found in the ASCE-7 2010 when using Staad.Pro.v8i. The location of the site falls
under Zone 2 of the Wind Zone Map of the Philippines. The Basic Wind Speed for Zone 2 is 200 kph. The
Exposure type of the site is under Type B for the project location is surrounded with other structures (Urban
Area). The Building is classified as Type III and is also classified as Partially Enclosed due to the openings
in the balcony.
49
Parameter Value
Basic Wind Speed 200 kph
Exposure Category Type B
Building Classification Category Type III
Structure Type Building Structure
Enclosure Classification Partially Enclosed
Building Height 19.2 m
Building Dimension 36 x 9.5 m
Table 4-18. Wind Load Parameters

4.3.4.4 Primary Loads and Load Combinations
After primary loads was defined, STAAD Pro could automatically generate load combinations which were
with same reference as NSCP 2010.
PRIMARY LOAD CASES

Number Name Type
1 EQ AT X Seismic
2 EQ AT Z Seismic
3 WINDWARD X Wind
4 WINDWARD Z Wind
5 LEEWARD X Wind
6 LEEWARD Z Wind
7 DL Dead
8 LL Live
Table 4-6.Primary Load Cases
The load combinations presented were based on Section 409.3.1 of the National Structural Code of the
Philippines (2010 Edition). The effect of each load combinations acting simultaneously in the structure were
investigated using Staad. Pro v8i.
50
COMBINATION LOAD CASES
Number Combination L/C name Primary Primary L/C Name Factor
7 DL 1.2
8 LL 1.6
7 DL 1.2
3 WINDWARD X 0.8
7 DL 1.2
4 WINDWARD Z 0.8
7 DL 1.2
5 LEEWARD X 0.8
7 DL 1.2
13 COMBINATION LOAD CASE 13 3 WINDWARD X 1.6
8 LL 1
7 DL 1.2
14 COMBINATION LOAD CASE 14 4 WINDWARD Z 1.6
8 LL 1
7 DL 1.2
15 COMBINATION LOAD CASE 15 5 LEEWARD X 1.6
8 LL 1
7 DL 1.2
16 COMBINATION LOAD CASE 16 6 LEEWARD Z 1.6
8 LL 1
7 DL 1.2
17 COMBINATION LOAD CASE 17 1 EQ AT X 1
8 LL 1
7 DL 1.2
18 COMBINATION LOAD CASE 18 2 EQ AT Z 1
8 LL 1
7 DL 0.9
3 WINDWARD X 1.6
7 DL 0.9
4 WINDWARD Z 1.6
7 DL 0.9
5 LEEWARD X 1.6
7 DL 0.9
6 LEEWARD Z 1.6
7 DL 0.9
1 EQ AT X 1
7 DL 0.9
2 EQ AT Z 1
7 DL 1.2
6 LEEWARD Z 0.8
Table 4-19. Load Combinations
51
4.3.5. Structural Analysis
After modeling the structure and applying the necessary data into the Staad. Pro v8i interface, the structural
analysis was performed. The loading results were shown in the following sections.
4.3.5.1 Primary Loadings
Figure 4-17. Dead Load
52
Figure 4-18. Live Load
Figure 4-19. Earthquake Load at X
53
Figure 4-21 Earthquake Load at Z
Figure 4-22. Windward at X
54
Figure 4-23. Windward at Z
55
Figure 4-24. Leeward at X
Figure 4-25. Leeward at Z
4.3.6. Summary of Staad Result
After analyzing the structure with the aid of STAAD. Pro v8i based on the load cases applied, the
following were the Loads and Moments to be resisted by the structure. These loads were used for the
design of the main structural members.
4.3.6.1. Beams
MAXIMUM NEGATIVE MAXIMUM MAXIMUM MAXIMUM MAXIMUM TORSION

MOMENT POSITIVE AXIAL SHEAR
MOMENT LOAD LOAD
370.812 KN-m 297.923 KN-m 163.246 305.864 KN 104.048 KN-m
KN
Table 4-20. Resulting Loads for Beams
56
4.3.6.2. Columns
Max. Axial Load (Fx) Moment at Y (My) Moment at Z (Mz)

1693.76 KN -92.375 KN-m 1.465 KN-m
Table 4-21. Resulting Loads for Columns
4.3.6.3. Slabs
Since the design for slabs using USD requires the loadings to be linearly distributed (KN/m), the designer
used the dead loads and live loads carried by the slabs.
Dead Load Live Load
2.68 KPa 3.8 KPa
Table 4-22. Resulting Loads for Slabs
4.3.7 Structural Design Process
The designer provided a simplified chart of design flow for each structural member. Computation was
based on formulas provided by NSCP 2010. Flexural and axial member was designed in accordance to
Section 410 of NSCP 2010, shear reinforcements was designed in accordance to Section 411 of NSCP
2010, two-way slab system was designed in accordance to Section 413 of NSCP 2010, strength and
serviceability requirements was checked using Section 409 of NSCP 2010, and general considerations was
mentioned in Section 408 of NSCP.
Design flow chart was the same as used in conventional slab system, then the designer proceeded to the
design of structural member
4.3.7.1. Design of Beams

Same as Section 4.2.7.1
4.3.7.1.1. Sample Beam Schedule for Trade- Off B
Stream of light Steel Reinforcements Bar

dimensions END SPAN MID SPAN diameter
b (mm) t (mm) top bot top bot
350 450 2 9 2 7 25
Table 4-23. Typical Beam Section for Trade- Off B
57
4.3.7.2. Design of Columns
Same as Section 4.2.7.2.
4.3.7.3.1. Sample Column Schedule for Trade- Off B
Column DIMENSIONS COLUMN BAR No. of bars

type B (mm) T (mm) HEIGHT DIAMETER
Corner 350 350 17.2 m 32 mm 12
Interior 350 350 17.2 m 25 mm 12
and
Edge
Table 4-24. Typical Column Section for Trade-Off B
4.3.7.3. Design of Slabs using Direct Design Method

Same as Section 4.2.7.3.
4.3.7.3.1. Sample Slab Schedule for Trade- Off B
INTERIOR PANELS

S-1 12 mm 4.5 m 3.5 m 150 mm
COLUMN STRIPS
MIDDLE STRIPS
EDGE BEAMS ( LONGER SIDE DISCONTINUOUS)

S-1 12 mm 4.5 m 3.5 m 150mm
COLUMN STRIPS
MIDDLE STRIPS

S-2 12 mm 4.5 m 2.5 m 150 mm
COLUMN STRIPS
MIDDLE STRIPS 58
EDGE BEAMS ( SHORTER SIDE DISCONTINUOUS)

S-1 12 mm 4.5 m 3.5 m 150 mm
COLUMN STRIPS
MIDDLE STRIPS

S-5 12 mm 2.25 m 2.25 m 150 mm
COLUMN STRIPS
SHORT STRIP BARS (M-) SHORT STRIP BARS (M+) LONG STRIP EDGE BARS (M-) LONG STRIP INT BARS (M-) LONG STRIP BARS (M+)
MIDDLE STRIPS
60 pcs @ 25 mm O.C. 30pcs @ 50 mm O.C. 18 pcs @ 50 mm O.C. 5 pcs @ 200 mm O.C. 14 pcs @ 50 mm O.C.
CORNER PANEL
S-1 12 mm 4.5 m 3.5 m 125 mm
COLUMN STRIPS
MIDDLE STRIP

S-2 12 mm 4.5 m 2.5 m 125 mm
COLUMN STRIPS
MIDDLE STRIP
6 pcs @ 175 mm O.C. 6 pcs @ 175 mm O.C. 6 pcs @ 175 mm O.C. 5 pcs @ 200 mm O.C. 5 pcs @ 200 mm O.C. 5 pcs @ 200 mm O.C.

S-3 12 mm 4.75 m 4.5 m 125 mm
COLUMN STRIPS
MIDDLE STRIP

S-4 12 mm 4.5 m 3.5 m 125 mm
COLUMN STRIPS
MIDDLE STRIP
Table 4-19. Typical Slab Schedule for Trade-Off B
59
4.4. Validation of Trade- Offs
To confirm whether the initial assumptions of the designer was correct in the previous chapter, a
validation of trade-offs in an in-depth manner was required. Detailed estimates and computations were
made for each trade-off with regards the constraints given, and the outcomes will be compared to the raw
rankings to produce the final ranking which will serve as the basis for choosing the final design.
Constraint Two- Way Slab w/ Flat Plates (Trade-Off B)

beams(Trade-Off A)
Economical 8096285.683 Php 8566182.564 Php
Safety 1.2348 1.277
Constructability 5659.065143 Man Hours 4335.891219 Man Hours
As expected by the designer, the constructability of the Second Trade- Off remained evident as it
was calculated that the man hours required to finish the job was quite less compared than the first Trade-
Off. But to the designer’s surprise, the safety factor came in favor of the Second Trade-Off. The results
generated will affect the final ranking of the two Trade-Offs.
4.5. Designer’s Final Ranking
Computation of Ranking for Cost Constraint:

The resulting numbers were based on the values found in Table 4-20 and the formulas shown in Chapter 3.
𝑯𝒊𝒈𝒉𝒆𝒓𝒗𝒂𝒍𝒖𝒆 − 𝑳𝒐𝒘𝒆𝒓𝒗𝒂𝒍𝒖𝒆
% 𝑫𝒊𝒇𝒇𝒆𝒓𝒆𝒏𝒄𝒆 = 𝟏
𝑺𝒖𝒃𝒐𝒓𝒅𝒊𝒏𝒂𝒕𝒆𝒓𝒂𝒏𝒌 = 𝟑
Computation of Ranking for Constructability Constraint:
% 𝑫𝒊𝒇𝒇𝒆𝒓𝒆𝒏𝒄𝒆 = 𝟑
60
𝑺𝒖𝒃𝒐𝒓𝒅𝒊𝒏𝒂𝒕𝒆𝒓𝒂𝒏𝒌 = 𝟐
Computation of Ranking for Safety Constraint:
% 𝑫𝒊𝒇𝒇𝒆𝒓𝒆𝒏𝒄𝒆 = 𝟑
𝑺𝒖𝒃𝒐𝒓𝒅𝒊𝑛𝒂𝒕𝒆𝒓𝒂𝒏𝒌 = 𝑮𝒐𝒗𝒆𝒓𝒏𝒊𝒏𝒈𝒓𝒂𝒏𝒌 − (% 𝒅𝒊𝒇𝒇𝒆𝒓𝒆𝒏𝒄𝒆)𝒙𝟏𝟎
𝑺𝒖𝒃𝒐𝒓𝒅𝒊𝒏𝒂𝒕𝒆𝒓𝒂𝒏𝒌 = 𝟏
Criterion’s Ability to satisfy the

Importance criterion
Decision Criteria (on a scale from -5 to 5)
(on a scale of 0 to 5) Two way
Slab with Flat Plate
beams
1. Cost 5 5 3
2. Safety 5 3 5
3. Constructability 3 5 4
Over-all Rank 55 52
Table 4-21. Final Designer’s Ranking
4.6. Designer’s Final Ranking Assessment
Contrary to the initial assumption of the designer. It seems that the Conventional Two- Way Slab is
still a viable option when it comes to certain circumstances. When it comes to costing flat plate generated
more costs because of the additional reinforcing bars that will be added to the slabs caused by the absence
of interior beams. Since no interior beams will help support the various loads generated upon the structure,
more strength should be provided to the slabs. When it comes to constructability, the designer was not
surprised by the advantage given by the flat plate system. What came as another interesting fact is that the
flat plate almost edged out the Conventional Two- Way system when it comes to safety. But by looking at
the data generated by STAAD. Pro, the flat plate system generated lesser gravity loads compared to the
61
slab with beams system, but doubled its bending moment, causing more stirrups into the design. These
realizations were made after computing the necessary data provided.
4.7. Influence of Multiple Constraints, Trade- Offs, and Standards in the Final Design.
Because of the different constraints, the designer made the design of each trade-offs to meet the
minimum requirements / standards as much as possible. The standards also serve as a limiting variable to
provide the validity of inputs and outputs of the design. The trade-offs which were presented were the
dependent variables in the project. The result of each design scheme, taking into consideration the
constraints and standards is weighed to determine the final design.
The following graphs aimed to give an illustrative approach to the influence of the set parameters to the
final design
4.7.1. Economic Comparison
Figure 4-26 Cost Comparison between the two Trade-Offs
The costs between the two trade- offs didn’t differ much, but in the end, the labor for the installation
of Flat Plates (Trade-Off 2) generates the greatest cost, and one should also take into consideration the
margin of costs generated by the Flat Plate system compared to the Two- Way Slab with beams system
(Trade- Off 1).
62
4.7.2. Safety Comparison
Figure 4- 27. Factor of Safety Comparison between the two Trade- Offs
As shown in Figure 4-27, the Flat Plate System outweighed the Two Slab w/ Beams System by a
small margin when it comes to factor of safety. And as stated by the designer in Section 4.6, the reason is
because lesser gravity loads were generated by the Flat Plate System, caused by the removal of interior
beams the weight of the structure was reduced. Therefore by using the same beam and column section for
the comparison of the two, greater capacities were generated by the Second Trade- Off, resulting to greater
factor of safety values.
4.7.3. Constructability Comparison
63
Figure 4-28 Cost Comparison between the two Trade-Offs
In Figure 4-28, it is really evident that the Flat Plate System outscores other methods in slab
construction, the only issue is about the formworks. Since the flat plate system requires more steel
reinforcements in the slabs, more installation time is required.
CHAPTER 5: FINAL DESIGN
Upon the trade-off analysis done in the previous chapter, the designer came up with the options to
be used in the final design of the Five- Story Dormitory Building. Based on the final rankings, the design
scheme to be used is the Two- Way Slab with Beams System.
On the construction phase of the project, the framing system shall be reinforced first before forming. As for
the slab, the form comes first before reinforcing. The formworks shall be made of plywood and to be used
in 60 percent efficiency.
The designer used a uniform bar diameter for the beams and slabs throughout the design of the structure
to provide uniformity. The members shall be casted with the use of ready-mixed concrete. The standard
curing days for casting must be followed.
64
The final structural design to be used in the construction is presented in the following section. This includes
the final and detailing of each structural member of the winning trade off: The Two- Way Slab with Beams
System.
5.1. Beam Details and Schedule
Figure 5-1. Final Detail for Stair Beam
65
Figure 5-1. Final Detail for Typical Beam
2ND LVL- ROOF DECK STEEL REINFORCEMENT
DIAMETER END MID
BEAMS LENGTH (m) B (m) T (m) Bar Dia. (mm) BOTTOM TOP BOTTOM TOP STIRRUP (mm)
B-1 4.5 0.3 0.4 25 2 7 2 5 50mm throughout
B-2 4.205 0.3 0.4 25 2 7 2 5 50mm throughout
B-3 2.25 0.3 0.4 25 2 7 2 5 50mm throughout
CB- 1 2.25 0.3 0.5 25 2 7 2 5 50mm throughout
G-1 4.5 0.3 0.4 25 2 7 2 5 50mm throughout
G-2 4.5 0.3 0.4 25 2 7 2 5 50mm throughout
G-3 4.5 0.3 0.4 25 2 7 2 5 50mm throughout
G-3a 4.5 0.3 0.4 25 2 7 2 5 50mm throughout
G-4 2.5 0.3 0.4 25 2 7 2 5 50mm throughout
G-5 7 0.3 0.4 25 2 7 2 5 50mm throughout
G-6 2.5 0.3 0.4 25 2 7 2 5 50mm throughout
G-7 7 0.3 0.4 25 2 7 2 5 50mm throughout
Table 5-1 Final Beam Schedule

ROOF LVL STEEL REINFORCEMENT
DIAMETER END MID
BEAMS LENGTH (m) B (m) T (m) Bar Dia. (mm) BOTTOM TOP BOTTOM TOP STIRRUP (mm)
RB-1 4.5 0.3 0.4 25 2 7 2 5 50mm throughout
RB-2 7 0.3 0.4 25 2 7 2 5 50mm throughout
RB-3 4.75 0.3 0.4 25 2 7 2 5 50mm throughout
RB-4 2.25 0.3 0.4 25 2 7 2 5 50mm throughout
Table 5-2. Final Beam Schedule

5.2. Column Details and Schedule
66
Final C-1 Detail Final C-2 Detail
COLUMN SCHEDULE
COLUMN T dbar pcs. dtie spacing
C-1 350mm 32mm 12 10mm 350mm
C-2 350mm 25mm 8 10mm 350mm
67
Table 5-3 Final Column Schedule
68
5.3. Slab Details and Schedule
Figure 5-3Final Typical Slab Detail
69
SHORT SPAN LONG SPAN
2ND FLOOR - ROOF DECK COLUMN STRIP MIDDLE STRIP COLUMN STRIP MIDDLE STRIP
SLAB LONGER (m) SHORTER (m) T (mm) BAR DIA. (mm) TOP BARS BOT BARS TOP BARS BOT BARS TOP BARS BOT BARS TOP BARS BOT BARS
S-1 (INT) 4.5 3.5 125 12 150mm O.C. 150mm O.C. 40mm O.C. 50mm O.C. 75mm O.C. 150mm O.C. 60mm O.C. 70mm O.C.
S-1 (LONG EDGE) 4.5 3.5 125 12 150mm O.C. 150mm O.C. 40mm O.C. 50mm O.C. 75mm O.C. 150mm O.C. 60mm O.C. 70mm O.C.
S-1 (SHORT EDGE) 4.5 3.5 125 12 150mm O.C. 150mm O.C. 40mm O.C. 50mm O.C. 75mm O.C. 150mm O.C. 60mm O.C. 70mm O.C.
S-1 (CORNER) 4.5 3.5 125 12 150mm O.C. 150mm O.C. 40mm O.C. 50mm O.C. 75mm O.C. 150mm O.C. 60mm O.C. 70mm O.C.
S-2 (CORNER) 4.5 2.5 125 12 150mm O.C. 150mm O.C. 40mm O.C. 50mm O.C. 75mm O.C. 150mm O.C. 60mm O.C. 70mm O.C.
S-2 ( LONG EDGE) 4.5 2.5 125 12 150mm O.C. 150mm O.C. 40mm O.C. 50mm O.C. 75mm O.C. 150mm O.C. 60mm O.C. 70mm O.C.
S-3 4.75 4.5 125 12 150mm O.C. 150mm O.C. 40mm O.C. 50mm O.C. 75mm O.C. 150mm O.C. 60mm O.C. 70mm O.C.
Table 5-4. Final Slab Schedule
APPENDICES
Appendix A: Notations
NOTATIONS
𝑨𝒈 = gross area of section, mm2.

𝑨𝒔 = area of nonprestressed tension reinforcement, mm2.
𝑨𝒔,𝒎𝒊𝒏 = minimum amount of flexural reinforcement, mm2.
𝑨𝒔𝒕 = total area of nonprestressed longitudinal reinforcement (bars and steel shapes), mm 2.
𝑨𝒗 = area of shear reinforcement within a distance s, mm2.
𝑨𝒗𝒇 = area of shear-friction reinforcement, mm2.
𝑨′𝒔 = area of compression reinforcement, mm2.
𝒃 = width of compression face of member, mm.
𝒃𝒘 = web width, mm.
𝒄 = distance from extreme compression fiber to neutral axis, mm.
𝒄𝒄 = clear cover from the nearest surface in tension to the surface of the flexural tension reinforcement,
mm.
𝑪𝒎 = a factor relating actual moment diagram to an equivalent uniform moment diagram.
𝑫 = dead loads, or related internal moments and forces.
𝒅 = distance from extreme compression fiber to centroid of tension reinforcement, mm.
𝒅′ = distance from extreme compression fiber to centroid of compression reinforcement, mm.
𝒅𝒃 = nominal diameter of bar, wire, or prestressing strand, mm.
𝒅𝒄 = thickness of concrete cover measure from extreme tension fiber to center of bar or wire located
closest thereto, mm.
70
𝒅𝒔 = distance from extreme tension fiber to centroid of tension reinforcement, mm.
𝒅𝒕 = distance from extreme compression fiber to extreme tension steel, mm.
𝑬 = load effects of earthquake, or related internal moments and forces.
𝑬𝒄 = modulus of elasticity of concrete, MPa.
𝑬𝒔 = modulus of elasticity of reinforcement, MPa.
𝑬𝑰 = flexural stiffness of compression member, N-mm2.
𝑭 = loads due to weight and pressures of fluids with well defined densities and controllable maximum
heights, or related internal moments and forces.
𝒇′𝒄 = specified compressive strength of concrete, MPa.
𝒇𝒚 = specified yield strength of nonprestressed reinforcement, MPa.
𝒇𝒚𝒕 = specified yield strength fy
𝑯 = loads due to weight and pressure of soil, water in soil, or other materials, or related internal moments
and forces.
𝒉 = overall thickness of member, mm.
𝑰 = moment of inertia of section beam about the centroidal axis, mm4.
𝑰𝒄𝒓 = moment of inertia of cracked section transformed to concrete, mm4.
𝑰𝒆 = effective moment of inertia for computation of deflection, mm4.
𝑰𝒈 = moment of inertia of gross concrete section about centroidal axis, neglecting reinforcement, mm 4.
𝑳 = live loads, or related internal moments and forces.
𝑳𝒅 = development length, mm.
𝒍𝒏 = length of clear span measured face-to-face of supports, mm.
𝑴𝒂 = maximum moment in member at stage deflection is computed.
𝑴𝒄𝒓 = cracking moment. See Equation 409-9.
𝑃𝒃 = nominal axial load strength at balanced strain conditions
𝑷𝒏 = nominal axial load strength at given eccentricity.
𝑽𝒄 = nominal shear strength provided by concrete
𝑾 = wind load, or related integral moments and forces.
𝒘𝒄 = unit weight of concrete, kN/m3.
𝒘𝒖 = factored load per unit length of beam or per unit area of slab.
𝜶𝒇 = ratio of flexural stiffness of beam section to flexural stiffness of a width of slab bounded laterally by
center line of adjacent panle, if any on each side of beam.
𝜶𝒇𝒎 = average value of 𝜶𝒇 for all beams on edges of a panel.
𝜷𝟏 = factor defined in Section 410.3.7.3
𝜺𝒕 = net tensile strain in extreme tension steel at nominal strength.
𝝀 = modification factor reflection the reduced mechanical properties of lightweight concrete.
𝝀𝜟 = multiplier for additional long-time deflection as defined in Section 409.6.2.5
𝝆 = ration of nonprestressed tension reinforcement = 𝑨𝒔 ⁄𝒃𝒅
𝝆′ = ratio of nonprestressed compression reinforcement = 𝑨′𝒔 ⁄𝒃𝒅
𝝆𝒃 = reinforcement ratio producing balanced strain conditions. See Section 410.4.2
𝜱 = strength-reduction factor. See Section 409.4
71
Appendix B: Detailed Calculation for the Design of Structural Members
Design of Slab
For the design of two-way slab, the designers will use Direct Design Method (DDM). In this
method, design moments are computed using the table in NSCP 2010 designated for interior negative
moment, exterior negative moment and positive moment. It is also necessary to assume section for
columns and beams for the determination of the minimum thickness of the slab.
Procedure:
1. Slab inputs
 Factored Dead load (including self-weight of slab) and Live Load in kPa,
Wu = 1.2DL + 1.6LL (NSCP 2010, equation 203-2)
 Specified Compressive Strength of Concrete in MPa, f’c
 Specified Yield Strength of nonprestressed reinforcement in MPa, fy
 Assumed Column and Beam Dimension in mm
 Assumed Slab Thickness (t) in mm
 Length of Shorter Side and Longer Side
2. Computation of Minimum Slab Thickness
 Compute for ratio of flexural stiffness for shorter and longer side,
𝑬𝒄𝒃𝑰𝒃
𝜶𝒇 = (NSCP 2010, equation 413-3)
𝑬𝒄𝒔𝑰𝒔
Where: Ecb = Modulus of elasticity of beam concrete in MPa

Ecs = Modulus of elasticity of slab concrete in MPa
Ib = gross moment of inertial about the centroidal axis of a section made up of
beam and slab
Is = the moment of inertia of the gross section of slab taken about the centroidal
axis
Note: The length of flange for Ib = (Beam Depth – t)(2) for interior panel and length of flange for Ib
= Beam Depth –t for edge panels. (Beam depth – t) > 4t, otherwise length of flange = 4t
 To determine the minimum thickness of slabs with beams, the following terms are used:
ln = clear span in the long direction, measured face to face of columns

β = the ratio of the long to the short clear span
αfm = the average value of the ratios of beam-to-slab stiffness on all sides of the panel
 Conditions
a. For 𝜶𝒇𝒎 ≤ 𝟎. 𝟐, the minimum thicknesses are obtained as they were for slabs
without interior beams spanning between their supports
72
b. For 𝟎. 𝟐 ≤ 𝜶𝒇𝒎 ≤ 𝟐. 𝟎, the thickness shall not be less than 125 mm or
𝒇𝒚
𝐥𝐧(𝟎.𝟖+ )
𝒉= 𝟏𝟒𝟎𝟎
, (NSCP 2010, equation 409-12)
𝟑𝟔+𝟓𝜷 (𝜶𝒇𝒎 −𝟎.𝟐)
c. For 𝜶𝒇𝒎 > 𝟐. 𝟎, the thickness shall not be less than 90mm or
𝒇𝒚
𝐥𝐧(𝟎.𝟖+ )
𝒉= 𝟏𝟒𝟎𝟎
, (NSCP 2010, equation 409-13)
𝟑𝟔+𝟗𝜷
Note: For panels that has beams on all sides, the equation below must be satisfied for beams in
two perpendicular directions.
𝜶𝒇𝟏 𝒍𝟐𝟐
𝟎. 𝟐 ≤ ≤ 𝟓. 𝟎 , (NSCP 2010, equation 413-2)
𝜶𝒇𝟐 𝒍𝟐𝟏
3. Static Moment for a Span

The total factored static moment, Mo, for a span shall be determined by the equation
𝒒𝒖𝒍𝟐 𝒍𝟐𝒏
𝑴𝒐 = , (NSCP 2010, equation 413-4)
𝟖
Where: qu = factored loads in kPa

l2 = center to center length of perpendicular side
ln = clear span of side that the Static Moment Mo is to be determined
4. Distribution of Moment
To distribute the total Static Moment for the spans, the following coefficients are used:
See Section 413.7.3.2 NSCP 2010
See Section 413.7.3.3 NSCP 2010
5. Distribution to Column Strip and Middle Strip
For Interior Negative Factored Moment (See Section 413.7.4.1 NSCP 2010)
For Positive Factored Moment (See Section 413.7.4.4 NSCP 2010)
For Exterior Negative Factored Moments (See Section 413.7.4.2)
6. Design of Main Slab Reinforcements and Spacing

Substitute Factored Moments to
73
𝑴𝒖 = 𝝓 𝒇′ 𝒄𝝎𝒃𝒅𝟐 (𝟏 − 𝟎. 𝟓𝟗𝝎)
Where:
b = 1 m strip
Φ = 0.9
d = thickness of slab
 Solve for ω and ρ

 Check if ρmax > ρ, otherwise adjust the section of slab
𝟎.𝟖𝟓𝒇′ 𝒄𝜷𝟔𝟎𝟎
𝛒𝐦𝐚𝐱 = 𝟎. 𝟕𝟓 𝒇𝒚(𝟔𝟎𝟎+𝒇𝒚) ,
 Check if ρ > otherwise use ρmin = ρact

𝟏.𝟒
𝝆𝒎𝒊𝒏 = ,
𝒇𝒚
 Get Area of main reinforcement for slab
𝑨𝒔 = 𝝆𝒃𝒅 ,
 Get the Spacing for the main reinforcement
𝑨𝒃
𝑺𝒑𝒂𝒄𝒊𝒏𝒈 = 𝒙 𝟏𝟎𝟎𝟎 ,
𝑨𝒔
7. Temperature bars of slab
 For temperature bars, select fyt = 275 MPa, ρt = 0.0020

 Get the Area of reinforcement
𝑨𝒔𝒕 = 𝝆𝒕 𝒃𝒕 , b = 1 m strip and t = thickness of slab
 Get spacing for temperature bars
𝑨𝒃
𝑺𝒑𝒂𝒄𝒊𝒏𝒈 = 𝑨𝒔𝒕 𝒙 𝟏𝟎𝟎𝟎
8. Detailing/Scheduling of Slab
Design of Beams
1. Design Inputs for Beams
 Actual Moment (N-mm) and Shear (N) obtained in Structural Analysis
 Specified Compressive Strength of Concrete in MPa, f’c
 Specified Yield Strength of nonprestressed reinforcement in MPa, fy
74
 Assume b = 200 mm
2. Compute for ρmax and ρmin and assume ρ that is within ρmax and ρmin
𝟎. 𝟖𝟓𝒇′ 𝒄𝜷𝟔𝟎𝟎
𝛒𝐦𝐚𝐱 = 𝟎. 𝟕𝟓
𝒇𝒚(𝟔𝟎𝟎 + 𝒇𝒚)
𝟏. 𝟒
𝝆𝐦𝐢𝐧 =
𝒇𝒚
3. Flexural Reinforcements
𝑴𝒖 = 𝝓 𝒇′ 𝒄𝝎𝒃𝒅𝟐 (𝟏 − 𝟎. 𝟓𝟗𝝎)
Note: If Mu > Actual Moment, therefore the beam must be designed as Singly Reinforced
Beam
If Mu < Actual Moment, therefore the beam must be designed as Doubly Reinforced
Beam
For Singly Reinforced Beam

 Compute for ω
𝝆𝒇𝒚
𝝎=
𝒇′𝒄
 Then, Mu = Actual moment and substitute b, ω, f’c, and Φ to the equation for moment
capacity
 Determine the value of d (effective depth of the beam)
 Get the Area of Tension reinforcement by:
𝐴𝑠 = 𝜌𝑏𝑑
 Select bar diameter then compute for the number of tension reinforcements by:
75
𝐴𝑠
𝑁=
𝐴𝑏
Note: Round up the value for N, to get sufficient area of tension steel needed for the
moment capacity
 Compute for ρact, check if 𝜌𝑚𝑖𝑛 ≤ 𝜌𝑎𝑐𝑡 ≤ 𝜌𝑚𝑎𝑥 , otherwise the steel does not yield
 To check if steel yields,
600(𝑑−𝑐)
𝑓𝑠 = 𝑐
To get for the value of c

C=T
0.85𝑓′𝑐 𝛽𝑐𝑏 = 𝐴𝑠 𝑓𝑦
Then substitute the value of c to fs equation, if fs>fy use fy otherwise use fs
For Doubly Reinforced Beam

 Assume b and d
 Compute Mu, if Mu < M(act) therefore beam must be designed as doubly
 Mu = M1
 Solve for As1
𝐴𝑠1 = 𝜌𝑚𝑎𝑥 𝑏𝑑
 M2 = M(act) – M1
 Solve for compression steel As2 using the equation:
𝜙𝑀2 = 𝜙𝐴𝑠2 𝑓𝑦 (𝑑 − 𝑑 ′ )
 Solve for the total tension steel area

𝐴𝑠 = 𝐴𝑠1 + 𝐴𝑠2
 Check if steel yields by computing the stress in compression steel

600(𝑐−𝑑′ )
𝑓′𝑠 = , stress in compression steel
𝑐
To get for the value of c

C=T
0.85𝑓′𝑐 𝛽𝑐𝑏 = 𝐴𝑠1 𝑓𝑦
Then substitute the value of c to fs equation

Note: if f’s > fy, use fy and As2 = As’
If f’s < fy, use f’s and As2 ≠ As’
 Select bar diameter and compute No. of bars for compression and tension steel
76
𝐴𝑠
𝑁=
𝐴𝑏
Note: Round up the value for N, to get sufficient area of steel needed for the moment
capacity
4. Shear Reinforcements
 Compute for the shear strength provided by concrete
𝑉𝑐 = 0.17𝜆√𝑓′𝑐 𝑏𝑤 𝑑, (NSCP 2010, equation 411-3)
If Vu > ΦVc, stirrups are necessary

1
If Vu < 2 𝜙𝑉𝑐, the beam is capable to resist shear force
 Calculate Vs, Shear Strength of Stirrups
𝑉𝑢
𝑉𝑠 = − 𝑉𝑐
𝜙
If Vs < 0.66√𝑓′𝑐𝑏𝑤 𝑑, Design for spacing of stirrups

If Vs > 0.66√𝑓′𝑐𝑏𝑤 𝑑, Adjust the size of the beam
 For spacing of stirrups
𝐴𝑣 𝑓𝑦𝑡 𝑑
𝑆= , (NSCP 2010, equation 411-15)
𝑉𝑠
If Vs < 0.33√𝑓′𝑐𝑏𝑤 𝑑 , smax = d/2 or 600mm

If Vs > 0.33√𝑓′𝑐𝑏𝑤 𝑑 , smax = d/4 or 300mm
77
Appendix C: Computation of Trade-Off 1 (Two-Way Slab with Beams)
MANUAL
COMPUTATION
FOR
DESIGN
78
OF
Beams
79
Typical Beams
The following are the given data:
Mu 248.615 kN-m Es 200000 MPa
Vu 331.4867 kN Ec 24870.06 MPa
f'c 28 MPa n 9
fy 415 MPa L 4.5 m
b 300 mm
t 400 mm
d' 62.5 mm
d 337.5 mm
Φbar 25 mm
Φtie 10 mm
Computation of Steel Area and Number of Bars
Step 1. Solve for ρmax and Mu(max)

ρb = (0.75*0.85*f'c*β1*600)/(fy*(600+fy) RESULTS
β = 0.85, for f'c < 28 MPa
ρmax = ρ = 0.75ρb β 0.85
ω = ρ*fy/f'c ρb 0.021611965
Mu(max) = Φ*f'c*ω*b*(d^2)*(1-.59ω) ρmax 0.016208974
Φ = 0.9 ω 0.240240148
* If Mu < Mu(max), design is Singly Reinforced Φ 0.9
* If Mu > Mu(max), design is Doubly Reinforced Mu(max) 177.55501965 kN-m
DOUBLY REINFORCED
Step 2. Using Doubly Reinforcement. Solving As1, Mu1, Mu2, and As2
As1 = ρmax*b*d As1 1641.159 mm2
Mu1 = Mu(max) Mu1 177.555 kN-m
Mu2 = Mu - Mu1 Mu2 71.05998 kN-m
Mu2 = Φ*As2*fy*(d-d'), Solve for As2 As2 691.8338 mm2
Step 3. Solve for the Stress of the Compression Steel

C=T a 95.38947 mm
0.85*f'c*a*b = As1*fy, Solve for a c 112.2229 mm
a = βc, Solve for c f's 265.8436 MPa
f's = 600*(c-d')/c A's 1080 mm2
* If f's > fy, A's = As2
* If f's < fy, A's = As2*fy/f's 80
Step 4. Determine the Number of Bars
As = As1 + As2 N 5 pcs
For Tension N' 3 pcs
N = As/Abar, Abar = pi*(Φbar^2)/4
For Compression
N' = A's/Abar, Abar = pi*(Φbar^2)/4
Design of the Vertical Stirrup
Step 1. Calculate the Shear Strength by Concrete (Vc) RESULTS

Vc = sqrt(f'c)*b*d/6
* If Vu > ΦVc, stirrups needed, go to Step II Vc 89.2941 kN
* If Vu < ΦVc, but Vu > .5*ΦVc Stirrups needed ΦVc 80.3647 kN
* If Vu < .5*Φ*Vc, stirrups are not needed .5ΦVc 40.18235 kN
Stirrups Needed
Step 2. Calculate the Shear Strength by Stirrup (Vs)

Vn = Vu/Φ Vn 368.3185 kN
Vs = Vn - Vc Vs 279.0244 kN
* If Vs < 0.67*sqrt(f'c)*b*d, go to Step 3. parameter 358.9623
* If Vs > 0.67*sqrt(f'c)*b*d, redesign.
Step 3. Spacing of Stirrups

Si = Av*fy*d/Vs, Av = pi*(Φtie^2)/4 0
For Smax, 0
* If Vs < 0.33*sqrt(f'c)*b*d, Smax = d/2 or 600mm (get smaller)
* If Vs > 0.33*sqrt(f'c)*b*d, Smax = d/4 or 400mm (get smaller)
Av 78.53982 mm2
Si 40 mm
parameter 176.8023 mm
Smax1 90 mm
Smax2 300 mm
Sf 220 mm
81
Design of Development Length
The following are the supplementary data.

cc 40 mm
Bar Coat Epoxy
Step 1. Determine the Value of the Coefficients (ψt,ψe,ψs,λ)

ψt = 1.0 for all other situations
ψe = 1.5 for epoxy-coated bars with cover less than 3d or 6d
= 1.2 for all other epoxy-coated bars RESULTS
= 1 for uncoated or zinc coated bars
ψt = .8 for 20 mm bars and smaller ψt 1
= 1 for 25 mm bars and larger ψe 1.2
λ = 1 for normal weight concrete ψs 1
λ 1
Step 2. Compute for the development length

ld = (fy*ψt*ψe*ψs*d)/(1.1*λ*sqrt(f'c)*((cc+Ktr)/d))
Ktr = 40*Atr/(S*N), Atr = 2*pi*(Φtie^2)/4 Atr 157.079633 mm2
Ktr 7.1399833
ld 1134.35303 mm
Part 4. Checking the Beam in Deflection

Step 1. Calculate the Gross Moment of Inertia and the Cracking Moment of the Beam
Ig = b(t^3)/12 RESULTS
Mcr = Ig*fr/ϒt, fr = 0.62*λ*sqrt(f'c), yt = t/2
Ig 1600000000 mm4
Step 2. Calcualte the Moment of Inertia of the fr 3.28073163 MPa
Cracked Section yt 250 mm
Icr = b*(d^3)/12 + nAs(d-c)+nAs'(c-d') Mcr 20.9966824 kN-m
82
Ig 1.6E+09 mm4
Icr 40968554 mm4
Step 3. Calculate the Effective Moment of Inertia

Ie = ((Mcr/Mu)^3)*Ig + ((1-(Mcr/Mu)^3)*Icr)
Ie 41907682 mm4
Step 4. Determine and Check the Deflection Checking of Deflection

Mu = W(L^2)/8, W=____ W 98.21827 kN/m
δ = 5*W*(L^4)/(384*Ec*Ie) δ 0.193215 mm
δmax = L/360 δmax 12.5 mm
Ok!
83
For Stair Beam
Mu 248.615 kN-m Es 200000 MPa
Vu 331.4867 kN Ec 24870.06 MPa
f'c 28 MPa n 9
fy 415 MPa L 4.5 m
b 300 mm
t 400 mm
d' 62.5 mm
d 337.5 mm
Φbar 25 mm
Φtie 10 mm

β = 0.85, for f'c < 28 MPa
ρmax = ρ = 0.75ρb β 0.85
ω = ρ*fy/f'c ρb 0.021611965
Φ = 0.9 ω 0.240240148
DOUBLY REINFORCED
As1 = ρmax*b*d As1 1641.159 mm2
Mu2 = Mu - Mu1 Mu2 71.05998 kN-m

C=T a 95.38947 mm
f's = 600*(c-d')/c A's 1080 mm2
For Compression

Stirrups Needed

Vn = Vu/Φ Vn 368.3185 kN
Vs = Vn - Vc Vs 279.0244 kN

For Smax, 0
Av 78.53982 mm2
Si 40 mm
Smax1 90 mm
Smax2 300 mm
Sf 220 mm
85

cc 40 mm
Bar Coat Epoxy

λ 1

Ktr 7.1399833
ld 1134.35303 mm

Ig 1600000000 mm4
86
Ig 1.6E+09 mm4
Icr 40968554 mm4

Ie 41907682 mm4

Mu = W(L^2)/8, W=____ W 98.21827 kN/m
δ = 5*W*(L^4)/(384*Ec*Ie) δ 0.193215 mm
Ok!
87
MANUAL
COMPUTATION
FOR
DESIGN
OF
COLUMNS
88
COLUMN DESIGN
INPUT DATA: eb= 268.3123 mm ok!

t= 350 mm
db= 25 mm s= 56.66667 f= 1178100
c= 40 mm x2= 215.8333 g= 407426.3
fy 415 Mpa x3= 134.1667 h= 589050
f'c 28 Mpa x= 157.05 i= 1178100
Ab= 490.875 sq.mm d'= 52.5 j= 7080.5
e= 34.55 mm d= 297.5 k= 81.66667
l= 163.3333
m= 245
n= 814852.5
CASES FOR VALUES OF C:
CASE 1 CASE 2
400.3778 c3 3009.213 1 371.3391 c3 3009.213 1
0 c2 -994456 -330.471 -20.4343 c2 -994456 -330.471
0 c 53253556 17696.84 -20.4343 c 1.28E+08 42659.42
1 d -5.5E+10 -1.8E+07 1 d -6.5E+10 -2.1E+07
CASE 3 CASE 4
374.2176 c3 3009.213 1 365.4637 c3 3009.213 1
-21.8735 c2 -994456 -330.471 -17.4966 c2 -994456 -330.471
-21.8735 c 1.22E+08 40578.74 -17.4966 c 1.22E+08 40578.74
1 d -6.4E+10 -2.1E+07 1 d -5.9E+10 -2E+07
CASE 5 CASE 6
403.2279 c3 3009.213 1 395.3696 c3 3009.213 1
-36.3787 c2 -994456 -330.471 -32.4495 c2 -994456 -330.471
-36.3787 c 46992364 15616.17 -32.4495 c 46992364 15616.17
1 d -5.5E+10 -1.8E+07 1 d -4.9E+10 -1.6E+07
CASE 7 CASE 8
392.4183 c3 3009.213 1 362.4797 c3 3009.213 1
-30.9738 c2 -994456 -330.471 -16.0045 c2 -994456 -330.471
-30.9738 c 53253556 17696.84 -16.0045 c 1.28E+08 42659.42
1 d -5E+10 -1.6E+07 1 d -5.9E+10 -2E+07
89
FOR VALUE OF Pn
Case1 yyy Case 6 yss
-276.555 Not Yield -272.458 Not Yield
521.3243 Yield 520.3277 Yield
-154.171 -154.171 -148.524 -148.524
Not Ok! Not Ok!
Case1 Case 6
3952.442077 3316.11954
Case 2f syy Case7 yys

515.1719 Yield 519.7285 Yield
-119.307 -119.307 -145.128 -145.128
Not Ok! Not Ok!
Case 2 Case 7
4332.481998 4083.963575
Case 3 ssy Case 8 sys

515.8244 Yield 513.0986 Yield
-123.005 -123.005 -107.559 -107.559
Ok! Not Ok!
Case 3 Case 8
3577.470281 4430.932537
Case 4 sss Checking of Load Capacity:

-245.656 Not Yield Po= 0.85f'cAg+Asfy
-379.732 Not Yield Po= 5360.058
513.8081 Yield Py= 3577.47
-111.579 -111.579 Pxoz= 5189.777 Pu= 2036.648
Not Ok! Pni= 3500.806 > Pn= 3133.305 ok!!
Case 4
3683.985173
Case 5 ysy
-278.842 Not Yield
-400.361 Not Yield
521.8804 Yield
-157.322 -157.322
Not Ok!
Case 5 90
3178.329361
SPACING OF COLUMN TIES
= 2036.648 KN f'c = 28 Mpa

= 63.123 KN fy = 415 Mpa
b= 350 mm = 275 Mpa
t= 350 mm = 0.75
𝐚 = 32 mm 𝐧= /
𝐢 = 10 mm = 84.2 KN
d= 284 mm
2
= 122500
= 157.08 2
SOLVE FOR SHEAR CAPACITY OF COLUMN I.

𝟏
>
𝟐
= 𝟎. 𝟏𝟕( 𝟏 + ) ′ bd
𝟏𝟒
= 195.601545 kN II.
𝟏
< <
𝟐
. >
CHECK FOR COLUMN CAPABILITY
Therefore, Use 𝟏
I. >
𝟐
Column is capable
𝐦𝐚𝐱𝟏 = 16 𝑑 𝑎 = 512 mm
𝐦𝐚𝐱𝟐 = 8 𝑑𝑡𝑖 𝑠 = 480 mm
=
𝐦𝐚𝐱𝟑 least column dimension = 350 mm
THEREFORE USE: 350 mm
91
MANUAL
COMPUTATION
FOR
DESIGN
OF
SLAB
92
DESIGN OF TWO- WAY SLABS W/ INTERIOR BEAMS USING DIRECT DESIGN METHOD
INPUT DATA:
f'c (Mpa) = 28 Beam Dimension (mm) Slab Dimension (mm)
fy (Mpa) = 275 W = 300 Shorter Side = 3500
DL (Kpa) = 2.68 D = 400 Longer Side = 4500
LL (Kpa) = 3.8 Column Dimension (mm) t = 125
qu (Kpa) = 12.836 W = 350
Econc (Mpa) = 24870.06 D = 350
INTERIOR PANELS CONDITIONS
COEFFICIENTS SHORT SIDE
β 1.285714 if αfm is <= 0.2 t will be determine as they were for
slabs w/o beams
For T Section UNIT if αfm is 0.2<= αfm <= 2.0 t > 125 mm or
Short Span h = ln ( 0.8 + fy/1400)
Area 1 = 106250 mm^2 36 + 5β (αfm-0.2)
Area 2 = 82500 mm^2 h = 62.80545 mm OK!
Area Tot = 188750 mm^2 if αfm > 2.0, t > 90 mmor
y = 250.0828 mm h = ln( 0.8 +fy/1400)
Ib1 = 9.5E+08 36 + 9β
Ib2 = 5.71E+08 h = 65.97973 mm OK!
Ib = 1.52E+09 mm^4
Is = 7.32E+08 mm^4 LONG SIDE
if αfm is <= 0.2 t will be determined as they were for
α1 = Ib/Is slabs w/o beams
α1 = 2.077256 if αfm is 0.2<= αfm <= 2.0 t > 125 mm or
h = ln ( 0.8 + fy/1400)
Long Span For T section 36 + 5β (αfm-0.2)
Area 1 = 106250 mm^2 h 82.74369 mm OK!
Area 2 = 82500 mm^2 if αfm > 2.0, t > 90 mmor
Area Tot = 188750 mm^2 h = ln( 0.8 +fy/1400)
y = 250.0828 mm 36 + 9β
Ib = 1.52E+09 mm^4 h 86.92568 mm OK!
Is = 5.7E+08 mm^4
αf1l2^2 = 0.777778 coef => 0.2
α2 = Ib/Is αf2l1^2 coef <= 5.0
α2 = 2.670758
αfm = α1(2)+α2(2)
4
αfm = 2.374007
93
SHORT INTERIOR PANEL
MOMENT = (qu)(l2)(ln^2)
8
Moment = 71.6429306 kN - m
Factor
M(-) 0.65 moment(factor) = 46.5679 kN - m
M(+) 0.35 moment(factor) = 25.07503 kN - m
Column Strip = 0.25*S = 875 mm L

COLUMN STRIP FACTOR Mcol
66.42857 M(-) x(factor)= 30.93439 kN-m
66.42857 M(+) x(factor)= 16.65698 kN-m
M for Beam (0.85*Mcol) M for Slab(0.15*Mcol) S

M(-) 26.29423 kN-m M(-) 4.640159 kN-m
M(+) 14.15843 kN-m M(+) 2.498547 kN-m
Middle Strip = L - 0.5*S = 2750 mm
MIDDLE STRIP
M(-) = M(-) - Mcol(-)= 15.63351 kN-m
M(+) = M(+) - Mcol(+)= 8.418044 kN-m
LONG INTERIOR PANEL

8
Moment = 96.7172544 kN - m
Factor
M(-) 0.65 moment(factor) = 62.86622 kN - m
M(+) 0.35 moment(factor) = 33.85104 kN - m
Column Strip = 0.25*L = 1125 mm

M(-) 81.66667 M(-) x(factor)= 51.34074 kN-m
M(+) 81.66667 M(+) x(factor)= 27.64502 kN-m
M for Beam (0.85*Mcol) M for Slab(0.15*Mcol)

M(-) 43.63963 kN-m M(-) 7.701111 kN-m
M(+) 23.49826 kN-m M(+) 4.146752 kN-m
Middle Strip = S - 0.5*L = 1250 mm

MIDDLE STRIP
M(-) = M(-) - Mcol(-)= 11.52547 kN-m
M(+) = M(+) - Mcol(+)= 6.206024 kN-m 94
LONG END DISCONTINUOUS
COEFFICIENTS
β = l/s
β = 1.285714
For T Section UNIT
Short Span
Area 1 = 106250 mm^2
Area 2 = 82500 mm^2
Area Tot = 188750 mm^2
y = 250.0828 mm
Ib1 = 9.5E+08
Ib2 = 5.71E+08
Ib = 1.52E+09 mm^4
Is = 7.32E+08 mm^4 L
α1 = 2.077256
Long Span For T section
Area 1 = 106250 mm^2
Area 2 = 82500 mm^2 S
y = 250.0828 mm
Ib = 1.52E+09
Is = 5.7E+08
α2 = Ib/Is
α2 2.670758
For L section
Area 1 = 71875 mm^2
Area 2 = 82500 mm^2
y = 230.6174 mm
Ib1 = 1.31E+09 mm^4
Ib2 = 6.82E+08 mm^4
Ib = 1.99E+09 mm^4
Is = 3.13E+08 mm^4
α3 = Ib/Is
α3 6.350844
αfm = α1+α2(2)+α3
4
average α
αfm = 3.442404
95
LONG EXT BEAM
8
Moment = 53.1944899 kN - m
Factor
M(-) 0.65 (M)(factor) = 34.57642 kN - m
M(+) 0.35 (M)(factor) = 18.61807 kN - m
Column Strip
= 0.25*L = 1125 mm
M(-) 81.66667 M(-) x(factor)= 28.23741 kN - m
M(+) 81.66667 M(+) x(factor)= 15.20476 kN - m
M(-) 24.0018 kN - m M(-) 4.235611 kN - m
M(+) 12.92404 kN - m M(+) 2.280714 kN - m
Middle Strip
= S - 0.5*L = 1250 mm
MIDDLE STRIP
M(-) = M(-) - Mcol(-)= 6.33901 kN - m
M(+) = M(+) - Mcol(+)
= 3.413313 kN - m
LONG INT BEAM

8
Moment = 96.7172544 kN - m
Factor
M(-) 0.65 (M)(factor) = 62.86622 kN - m
M(+) 0.35 (M)(factor) = 33.85104 kN - m
Column Strip
= 0.25*L = 1125 mm
Factor Mcol
M(-) (kN - m)
81.66667 M(-) x(factor)= 51.34074 kN - m
M(+) (kN-m)81.66667 M(+) x(factor)= 27.64502 kN - m

M(-) 43.63963 kN - m M(-) 7.701111 kN - m
M(+) 23.49826 kN - m M(+) 4.146752 kN - m
Middle Strip
= S - 0.5*L = 1250 mm
MIDDLE STRIP
M(-) (kN - m)
= M(-) - Mcol(-)= 11.52547 kN - m
M(+) (kN-m)= M(+) - Mcol(+)
= 6.206024 kN - m
96
LONG INT BEAMS
α(l2/l1) 2.077256
8
Moment = 96.71725
Factor
M(-) int 0.7 (M)(factor)= 67.70208 kN - m
M(+) 0.57 (M)(factor)= 55.12883 kN - m
M(-)ext 0.16 (M)(factor)= 15.47476 kN - m
Column Strip
= 0.25*l = 875 mm
Factor Moment
M(-) int 81.66667 M(-) x(factor)
= 55.29003 kN - m
M(+) 81.66667 M(+) x(factor)
= 45.02188 kN - m SAMPLE FIGURES:
M(-)ext 78.78221 M(+) x(factor)
= 12.19136 kN - m
M(-) int 46.99653 kN - m M(-) int 8.293505 kN - m y1
M(+) 38.2686 kN - m M(+) 6.753282 kN - m
M(-)ext 10.36265 kN - m M(-)ext 1.828704 kN - m
Middle Strip
= S-0.5L = 2750 mm x1
MIDDLE STRIP
M(-) int = M(-) - Mcol(-)
= 12.41205 kN - m
M(+) = M(+) - Mcol(+)
= 10.10695 kN - m
M(-)ext = M(+) - Mcol(+)
= 3.283403 kN - m
x1 = 300 x2 = 125
y1 = 400 y2 = 275 Y1
C1 = 1.9E+09 C2 = 1.28E+08
C = Σ (1-0.63(X/Y)(X^3Y/3) X1
C = 2.03E+09
x1 = 275 x2 = 125
y1 = 300 y2 = 575
C1 = 8.79E+08 C2 = 3.23E+08
C = Σ (1-0.63(X/Y)(X^3Y/3)
C = 1.2E+09
LARGER VALUE OF C
C = 2.03E+09
Bt = EcC α(l2/l1) = 2.077256

2EcIs
Bt 1.778922
Bt(act) if Bt > 2.5, then Bt(act) = 2.5, otherwise Bt(act) = Bt
α(l2/l1) act if α(l2/l1) >1, use 1, otherwise use α(l2/l1)
97
CORNER PANEL
COEFFICIENTS
β 1.285714
For T Section UNIT
Short Span
Area 1 = 106250 mm^2
Area 2 = 82500 mm^2 S
y = 250.0828 mm
Ib1 = 9.5E+08
Ib2 = 5.71E+08
Ib = 1.52E+09 mm^4 L
Is = 7.32E+08 mm^4
α1 = Ib/Is
α1 = 2.077256
For L section
Ib1 = 1.31E+09
Ib2 = 6.82E+08
Ib = 1.99E+09 L
Is = 3.95E+08
α3 = Ib/Is
α3 = 5.041391
Long Span For T section S

Area 1 = 106250 mm^2
Area 2 = 82500 mm^2
y = 250.0828 mm
Ib = 1.52E+09
Is = 5.7E+08
α2 = Ib/Is
α2 2.670758
For L section
Ib1 = 1.31E+09
Ib2 = 6.82E+08
Ib = 1.99E+09 mm^4
Is = 3.13E+08 mm^4
α4 = Ib/Is
α4 6.350844
αfm = α1+ α2(2) +α3
4
average α 98
αfm = 8.070124
SHORT EXT BEAM
8
Moment = 38.60758 kN - m
Factor
M(-) int 0.7 (M)(factor)= 27.02531 kN - m
M(+) 0.57 (M)(factor)= 22.00632 kN - m
M(-)ext 0.16 (M)(factor)= 6.177213 kN - m
Column Strip
= 0.25*S = 875 mm
Factor Mcol
M(-) int 66.42857 M(-) x(factor)
= 17.95252 kN - m
M(+) 66.42857 M(+) x(factor)
= 14.61848 kN - m
M(-)ext 82.73537 M(+) x(factor)
= 5.11074 kN - m
M for Beam M for Slab
M(-) int 15.25965 kN - m M(-) int 2.692879 kN - m
M(+) 12.42571 kN - m M(+) 2.192773 kN - m
M(-)ext 4.344129 kN - m M(-)ext 0.766611 kN - m
Middle Strip
= L- 0.5*S = 2750 mm
MIDDLE STRIP
M(-) int = M(-) - Mcol(-)
= 9.072781 kN - m
M(+) = M(+) - Mcol(+)
= 7.387836 kN - m
M(-)ext = M(+) - Mcol(+)
= 1.066473 kN - m
LONG EXT BEAM α(l2/l1) 2.077256
8
Moment = 53.19449
Factor
M(-) int 0.7 (M)(factor)= 37.23614 kN - m
M(+) 0.57 (M)(factor)= 30.32086 kN - m
M(-)ext 0.16 (M)(factor)= 8.511118 kN - m
Column Strip
= 0.25*l = 1125 mm
Factor Moment
M(-) int 81.66667 M(-) x(factor)
= 30.40952 kN - m
M(+) 81.66667 M(+) x(factor)
= 24.76204 kN - m
M(-)ext 84.87744 M(+) x(factor)
= 7.22402 kN - m
M(-) int 25.84809 kN - m M(-) int 4.561428 kN - m
M(+) 21.04773 kN - m M(+) 3.714305 kN - m
M(-)ext 6.140417 kN - m M(-)ext 1.083603 kN - m
Middle Strip
= S-0.5L = 1250 mm
MIDDLE STRIP
M(-) int = M(-) - Mcol(-)
= 6.826626 kN - m
M(+) = M(+) - Mcol(+)
= 5.558824 kN - m
M(-)ext = M(+) - Mcol(+)
= 1.287099 kN - m 99
LONG INT BEAM
α(l2/l1) 2.077256
8
Moment = 96.71725
Factor
M(-) int 0.7 (M)(factor)= 67.70208 kN - m
M(+) 0.57 (M)(factor)= 55.12883 kN - m
M(-)ext 0.16 (M)(factor)= 15.47476 kN - m
Column Strip
= 0.25*l = 875 mm
Factor Moment
M(-) int 81.66667 M(-) x(factor)
= 55.29003 kN - m
M(+) 81.66667 M(+) x(factor)
= 45.02188 kN - m
M(-)ext 84.87744 M(+) x(factor)
= 13.13458 kN - m
M(-) int 46.99653 kN - m M(-) int 8.293505 kN - m
M(+) 38.2686 kN - m M(+) 6.753282 kN - m
M(-)ext 11.16439 kN - m M(-)ext 1.970187 kN - m
Middle Strip
= S-0.5L = 1250 mm
MIDDLE STRIP
M(-) int = M(-) - Mcol(-)
= 12.41205 kN - m
M(+) = M(+) - Mcol(+)
= 10.10695 kN - m
M(-)ext = M(+) - Mcol(+)
= 2.340179 kN - m
SHORT INT BEAM
α(l2/l1) 2.670758
8
Moment = 71.64293 kN - m
Factor
M(-) int 0.7 (M)(factor)= 50.15005 kN - m
M(+) 0.57 (M)(factor)= 40.83647 kN - m
M(-)ext 0.16 (M)(factor)= 11.46287 kN - m
Column Strip
= 0.25*S = 875 mm
Factor Mcol
M(-) int 66.42857 M(-) x(factor)
= 33.31396 kN - m
M(+) 66.42857 M(+) x(factor)
= 27.12708 kN - m
M(-)ext 82.73537 M(+) x(factor)
= 9.483847 kN - m
M(-) int 28.31687 kN - m M(-) int 4.997094 kN - m
M(+) 23.05802 kN - m M(+) 4.069063 kN - m
M(-)ext 8.06127 kN - m M(-)ext 1.422577 kN - m
Middle Strip
= L- 0.5*S = 2750 mm
MIDDLE STRIP
M(-) int = M(-) - Mcol(-)
= 16.83609 kN - m 100
M(+) = M(+) - Mcol(+)
= 13.70939 kN - m
M(-)ext = M(+) - Mcol(+)
= 1.979022 kN - m
x1 = 300 x2 = 125
y1 = 400 y2 = 275
C1 = 1.9E+09 C2 = 1.28E+08
C = Σ (1-0.63(X/Y)(X^3Y/3)
C = 2.03E+09
x1 = 275 x2 = 125
y1 = 300 y2 = 575
c1 = 8.79E+08 C2 = 3.23E+08
C = Σ (1-0.63(X/Y)(X^3Y/3)
C = 1.2E+09
LARGER VALUE OF C
C 2.03E+09
Bt = EcC α(l2/l1) = 2.670758

2EcIs
Bt = 1.383606
Bt(act) if Bt > 2.5, then Bt(act) = 2.5, otherwise Bt(act) = Bt

α(l2/l1) act if α(l2/l1) >1, use 1, otherwise use α(l2/l1)
SAMPLE FIGURES:
y1
Y1
x1
X1
101
x1 = 300 x2 = 125
y1 = 400 y2 = 275
C1 = 1.9E+09 C2 = 1.28E+08
C = Σ (1-0.63(X/Y)(X^3Y/3)
C = 2.03E+09
x1 = 275 x2 = 125
y1 = 300 y2 = 575
C1 = 8.79E+08 C2 = 3.23E+08
C = Σ (1-0.63(X/Y)(X^3Y/3)
C = 1.2E+09
LARGER VALUE OF C
C 2.03E+09
Bt = EcC α(l2/l1) = 2.077256

2EcIs
Bt 1.778922
SAMPLE FIGURES:
y1
Y1
x1
X1
102
SAMPLE FOR COMPUTATION OF NO. OF BARS ( SAME PROCESS IN ALL CASES )
Design of Short Column Strip (@ negative moment)
Moment Capacity: Spacing
Mcap = φf'cbd^2ω(1-0.59ω)
ASSUME 1m STRIP Spacing Ab*(1000)
b = 1000 mm As
Bar Diameter
= 12 mm Spacing 236.3356 ≈ 236 mm
Clear cover= 25 mm
d = t - 0.5(bar diameter) - 25 Spacing requirements:
d = 94 mm
Mu = 4.640159 kN-m Spacing < 3t (mm) 375 OK!
Assume Mu= Mcap < 450 OK!
4.640159 = φf'cbd^2ω(1-0.59ω)
Solve for ω by quadratic equation
a = 0.59 Resulting Design:
b = -1 t = 125 mm
c = 0.020839 5 pcs. of 12 mm
aω^2+bω+c = 0 bar diameter
ω = 0.021102 Spacing = 236 mm O.C.
ρ = 0.002149 say 225 mm O.C.
As = ρbd
= 201.9625 mm^2
No. of Bars= As
Ab
No. of Bars= 2
Check the design
d(act) = 94 mm
No of 12mm bars 2
ρ(act) = As
bd
ρ(act) = 0.002406
ρmin = 1.4
fy
ρmin = 0.005091 < ρ(act) NOT OK!
Therefore, use ρ= 0.005091 ω= 0.05
As = 478.5455
No. of Bars= As
Ab
No. of Bars = 5 12mm diameter Bars per 1m
Mcap = 10.80493
Mcap > Mu Design is safe! 103
Appendix D: Computation of Trade-Off 2 (Flat Slab)
MANUAL
COMPUTATION
FOR
DESIGN
OF
BEAMS
104
Typical Beams
Mu 297.293 kN-m Es 200000 MPa
Vu 396.3907 kN Ec 24870.06 MPa
f'c 28 MPa n 9
fy 415 MPa L 4.5 m
b 300 mm
t 400 mm
d' 62.5 mm
d 337.5 mm
Φbar 25 mm
Φtie 10 mm

β = 0.85, for f'c < 28 MPa
ρmax = ρ = 0.75ρb β 0.85
ω = ρ*fy/f'c ρb 0.021611965
Φ = 0.9 ω 0.240240148
DOUBLY REINFORCED
As1 = ρmax*b*d As1 1641.159 mm2
Mu2 = Mu - Mu1 Mu2 119.738 kN-m

C=T a 95.38947 mm
f's = 600*(c-d')/c A's 1819.829 mm2
For Compression

Stirrups Needed

Vn = Vu/Φ Vn 440.4341 kN
Vs = Vn - Vc Vs 351.14 kN

For Smax, 0
Av 78.53982 mm2
Si 40 mm
Smax1 90 mm
Smax2 300 mm
Sf 220 mm
106

cc 40 mm
Bar Coat Epoxy

λ 1

Ktr 7.1399833
ld 1134.35303 mm

4
Ig 1600000000 mm
107
Ig 1.6E+09 mm4
Icr 42183467 mm4

Ie 42732267 mm4

Mu = W(L^2)/8, W=____ W 117.4491 kN/m
δ = 5*W*(L^4)/(384*Ec*Ie) δ 0.226588 mm
Ok!
108
109
Stair Beams
Mu 297.293 kN-m Es 200000 MPa
Vu 396.3907 kN Ec 24870.06 MPa
f'c 28 MPa n 9
fy 415 MPa L 4.5 m
b 300 mm
t 400 mm
d' 62.5 mm
d 337.5 mm
Φbar 25 mm
Φtie 10 mm

β = 0.85, for f'c < 28 MPa
ρmax = ρ = 0.75ρb β 0.85
ω = ρ*fy/f'c ρb 0.021611965
Φ = 0.9 ω 0.240240148
DOUBLY REINFORCED
As1 = ρmax*b*d As1 1641.159 mm2
Mu2 = Mu - Mu1 Mu2 119.738 kN-m

C=T a 95.38947 mm
f's = 600*(c-d')/c A's 1819.829 mm2
For Compression

Stirrups Needed

Vn = Vu/Φ Vn 440.4341 kN
Vs = Vn - Vc Vs 351.14 kN

For Smax, 0
Av 78.53982 mm2
Si 40 mm
Smax1 90 mm
Smax2 300 mm
Sf 220 mm
111

cc 40 mm
Bar Coat Epoxy

λ 1

Ktr 7.1399833
ld 1134.35303 mm

Ig 1600000000 mm4
112
Ig 1.6E+09 mm4
Icr 42183467 mm4

Ie 42732267 mm4

Mu = W(L^2)/8, W=____ W 117.4491 kN/m
δ = 5*W*(L^4)/(384*Ec*Ie) δ 0.226588 mm
Ok!
113
MANUAL
COMPUTATION
FOR
DESIGN
OF
COLUMNS
114
115
COLUMN DESIGN
INPUT DATA: eb= 268.3123 mm ok!

t= 350 mm
db= 25 mm s= 56.66667 f= 1178100
c= 40 mm x2= 215.8333 g= 407426.3
fy 415 Mpa x3= 134.1667 h= 589050
f'c 28 Mpa x= 157.05 i= 1178100
Ab= 490.875 sq.mm d'= 52.5 j= 7080.5
e= 34.55 mm d= 297.5 k= 81.66667
l= 163.3333
m= 245
n= 814852.5
CASES FOR VALUES OF C:
CASE 1 CASE 2
499.0398 c3 3009.213 1 474.6059 c3 3009.213 1
0 c2 -1232963 -409.729 -32.4383 c2 -1232963 -409.729
0 c 2184422 725.9116 -32.4383 c 68357503 22716.08
1 d -6.8E+10 -2.3E+07 1 d -7.6E+10 -2.5E+07
CASE 3 CASE 4
500.9059 c3 3009.213 1 488.048 c3 3009.213 1
-45.5882 c2 -1232963 -409.729 -39.1593 c2 -1232963 -409.729
-45.5882 c 5008867 1664.511 -39.1593 c 5008867 1664.511
1 d -7.1E+10 -2.4E+07 1 d -5.9E+10 -1.9E+07
CASE 5 CASE 6
403.2279 c3 3009.213 1 395.3696 c3 3009.213 1
-36.3787 c2 -994456 -330.471 -32.4495 c2 -994456 -330.471
-36.3787 c 46992364 15616.17 -32.4495 c 46992364 15616.17
1 d -5.5E+10 -1.8E+07 1 d -4.9E+10 -1.6E+07
CASE 7 CASE 8
392.4183 c3 3009.213 1 362.4797 c3 3009.213 1
-30.9738 c2 -994456 -330.471 -16.0045 c2 -994456 -330.471
-30.9738 c 53253556 17696.84 -16.0045 c 1.28E+08 42659.42
1 d -5E+10 -1.6E+07 1 d -5.9E+10 -2E+07
116
FOR VALUE OF Pn
Case1 yyy Case 6 yss
521.3243 Yield 520.3277 Yield
-154.171 -154.171 -148.524 -148.524
Not Ok! Not Ok!
Case1 Case 6
3952.442077 3316.11954
Case 2f syy Case7 yys

-428.911 Yield -394.862 Not Yield
529.2044 Yield 519.7285 Yield
-228.323 -228.323 -145.128 -145.128
Ok! Not Ok!
Case 2 Case 7
6626.124193 4083.963575
Case 3 ssy Case 8 sys

-437.894 Yield -377.919 Not Yield
532.9215 Yield 513.0986 Yield
-247.838 -247.838 -107.559 -107.559
Not Ok! Not Ok!
Case 3 Case 8
5526.160538 4430.932537
Case 4 sss Checking of Load Capacity:

-245.656 Not Yield Po= 0.85f'cAg+Asfy
-379.732 Not Yield Po= 6920.663
513.8081 Yield Py= 3658.28
-111.579 -111.579 Pxoz= 6626.124 Pu= 1693.76
Not Ok! Pni= 3574.295 > Pn= 2605.785 ok!!
Case 4
3683.985173
Case 5 ysy
-278.842 Not Yield
-400.361 Not Yield
521.8804 Yield
-157.322 -157.322
Not Ok!
Case 5 117
3178.329361
SPACING OF COLUMN TIES
= 2036.648 KN f'c = 28 Mpa
= 63.123 KN fy = 415 Mpa
b= 350 mm = 275 Mpa
t= 350 mm = 0.75
𝐚 = 32 mm 𝐧= /
𝐢 = 10 mm = 84.2 KN
d= 284 mm
2
= 122500
= 157.08 2
SOLVE FOR SHEAR CAPACITY OF COLUMN I.

𝟏
>
𝟐
= 𝟎. 𝟏𝟕( 𝟏 + ) ′ bd
𝟏𝟒
= 195.601545 kN II.
𝟏
< <
𝟐
. >
CHECK FOR COLUMN CAPABILITY
Therefore, Use 𝟏
II. < <
𝟐
NOT OK!
𝐦𝐚𝐱𝟏 = 𝑑 142 mm
=
2
𝐦𝐚𝐱𝟐 = 𝐴𝑣 𝑦
= 376 mm
0.062 𝑓 ′𝑐
𝐦𝐚𝐱𝟑 =
= 353 mm
0.35
LIMITATIONS OF COLUMN TIES SPACING

𝐦𝐚𝐱𝟔 = 350mm
𝐦𝐚𝐱𝟒 = 16 𝑑 𝑎 = 512 mm Therefore use = 142mm
𝐦𝐚𝐱𝟓 = 8 𝑑𝑡𝑖 𝑠 = 480 mm
118
MANUAL
COMPUTATION
FOR
DESIGN
OF
SLAB
119
DESIGN OF TWO- WAY SLABS W/O INTERIOR BEAMS USING DIRECT DESIGN METHOD
INPUT DATA:
f'c (Mpa) = 28 Beam Dimension (mm) Slab Dimension (mm)
fy (Mpa) = 275 W = 350 Shorter Side = 3500
DL (Kpa) = 2.68 D = 450 Longer Side = 4500
LL (Kpa) = 3.8 Column Dimension (mm) t = 150
qu (Kpa) = 12.836 W = 350 Minimum Thickness:
Econc (Mpa) = 24870.06 D = 350 Csl/33 125.7576 mm
FOR INTERIOR SPANS:
Short Span:
STATIC MOMENT (Mo): DISTRIBUTION OF MOMENTS:
qu (l2)(ln^2) M(-) 0.65 (Mo) = -32.0272 KN-m
8 M(+) 0.35(Mo) = 17.24543 KN-m
= 49.27265 KN-m
Factor:
NEGATIVE 0.65
POSITIVE 0.35
DISTRIBUTION TO COLUMN AND MIDDLE STRIPS:
NEG. MOMENT:
COLUMN STRIP = (0.75)(M-) = -24.0204 KN-m
MIDDLE STRIP = (0.25)(M-) = -8.00681 KN-m
POS. MOMENT:
COLUMN STRIP = (0.60)(M+)= 10.34726 KN-m
MIDDLE STRIP = (0.40)(M+)= 6.898172 KN-m
Long Span:
STATIC MOMENT (Mo): DISTRIBUTION OF MOMENTS:
qu (l2)(ln^2) M(-) 0.65 (Mo) = -43.2364 KN-m
8 M(+) 0.35(Mo) = 23.28116 KN-m
= 66.5176 KN-m
Factor:
NEGATIVE 0.65
POSITIVE 0.35
DISTRIBUTION TO COLUMN AND MIDDLE STRIPS:

NEG. MOMENT:
COLUMN STRIP = (0.75)(M-) = -32.4273 KN-m
MIDDLE STRIP = (0.25)(M-) = -10.8091 KN-m
POS. MOMENT:
COLUMN STRIP = (0.60)(M+)= 13.9687 KN-m
MIDDLE STRIP = (0.40)(M+)= 9.312464 KN-m
120
LONG END DISCONTINUOUS
COEFFICIENTS
β = l/s
β = 1.285714
For T Section UNIT
Short Span
Area 1 = 120000 mm^2
Area 2 = 75000 mm^2
y = 248.0769 mm
Ib1 = 9.35E+08
Ib2 = 3.91E+08
Ib = 1.33E+09 mm^4 L
Is = 1.27E+09 mm^4
α1 = 1.047673
Area 1 = 120000 mm^2 S
Area 2 = 75000 mm^2
y = 248.0769 mm
Ib = 1.33E+09
Is = 9.84E+08
α2 = Ib/Is
DO NOT CONSIDER THIS SECTION
α2 1.347009
For L section
Area 1 = 82500 mm^2
Area 2 = 75000 mm^2
y = 229.7619 mm
Ib1 = 1.24E+09 mm^4
Ib2 = 4.21E+08 mm^4
Ib = 1.66E+09 mm^4
Is = 5.41E+08 mm^4
α3 = Ib/Is
α3 3.074339
αfm = α1+α2(2)+α3
4
average α
αfm = 1.704007
121
LONG EXT BEAM
8
Moment = 54.18909 kN - m
Factor
M(-) 0.65 (M)(factor)= 35.22291 kN - m
M(+) 0.35 (M)(factor)= 18.96618 kN - m
Column Strip
= 0.25*L = 1250 mm
M(-) 81.66667 M(-) x(factor)
= 28.23741 kN - m
M(+) 81.66667 M(+) x(factor)
= 15.20476 kN - m
M(-) 24.0018 kN - m M(-) 4.235611 kN - m
M(+) 12.92404 kN - m M(+) 2.280714 kN - m
Middle Strip
= S - 0.5*L = 1250 mm
MIDDLE STRIP
M(-) = M(-) - Mcol(-)
= 6.457533 kN - m
M(+) = M(+) - Mcol(+)
= 3.477133 kN - m
CONDITIONS:
LONG SIDE
if αfm is <= 0.2 t will be determined as they were for slabs
w/o beams
if αfm is 0.2<= αfm <= 2.0 t > 125 mm or
h = ln ( 0.8 + fy/1400)
36 + 5β (αfm-0.2)
h 68.72881 mm OK!
if αfm > 2.0, t > 90 mmor
h = ln( 0.8 +fy/1400)
36 + 9β
h 65.97973 mm OK!
αf1l2^2 = 0.777778 coef => 0.2

αf2l1^2 coef <= 5.0
122
SHORT END DISCONTINUOUS
COEFFICIENTS
β 1.285714
For T Section UNIT
Short Span
Area 1 = 120000 mm^2
Area 2 = 75000 mm^2
y = 248.0769 mm
Ib1 = 9.35E+08 S
Ib2 = 3.91E+08
Ib = 1.33E+09 mm^4
Is = 1.27E+09 mm^4
α1 = Ib/Is L
α1 = 1.047673
For L section
Ib1 = 1.24E+09
Ib2 = 4.21E+08
Ib = 1.33E+09
Is = 9.84E+08
α3 = Ib/Is
α3 = 1.347009

Area 1 = 120000 mm^2
Area 2 = 75000 mm^2
y = 248.0769 mm
Ib = 1.52E+09 mm^4
Is = 5.7E+08 mm^4
α2 = Ib/Is
α2 = 1.347009
αfm = α1+ α2(2) +α3

4
average α
αfm = 1.545536
123
SHORT EXT BEAM
8
Moment = 39.32944 kN - m
Factor
M(-) 0.65 (M)(factor)= 25.56414 kN - m
M(+) 0.35 (M)(factor)= 13.7653 kN - m
Column Strip
= 0.25*S = 875 mm
COLUMN STRIP
Factor Mcol
M(-) 66.42857 M(-) x(factor)
= 16.98189 kN - m
M(+) 66.42857 M(+) x(factor)
= 9.144095 kN - m

M(-) 14.43461 kN - m M(-) 2.547284 kN - m
M(+) 7.772481 kN - m M(+) 1.371614 kN - m
Middle Strip
= L-0.5S = 2750 mm
MIDDLE STRIP
M(-) = M(-) - Mcol(-)
= 8.582246 kN - m
M(+) = M(+) - Mcol(+)
= 4.621209 kN - m
CONDITIONS
SHORT SIDE
if αfm is <= 0.2 t will be determined as they were for slabs
w/o beams
if αfm is 0.2<= αfm <= 2.0 t > 125 mm or
h = ln ( 0.8 + fy/1400)
36 + 5β (αfm-0.2)
h = 70.29695 mm OK!
if αfm > 2.0, t > 90 mmor
h = ln( 0.8 +fy/1400)
36 + 9β
h = 65.97973 mm OK!
αf1l2^2 = 0.777778 coef => 0.2

αf2l1^2 coef <= 5.0
124
CORNER PANEL
COEFFICIENTS
β 1.285714
For T Section UNIT
Short Span
Area 1 = 106250 mm^2
Area 2 = 82500 mm^2 S
y = 250.0828 mm
Ib1 = 9.5E+08
Ib2 = 5.71E+08
Ib = 1.52E+09 mm^4 L
Is = 7.32E+08 mm^4
α1 = Ib/Is
α1 = 2.077256
For L section
Ib1 = 1.31E+09
Ib2 = 6.82E+08
Ib = 1.99E+09 L
Is = 3.95E+08
α3 = Ib/Is
α3 = 5.041391
Long Span For T section S

Area 1 = 106250 mm^2
Area 2 = 82500 mm^2
y = 250.0828 mm
Ib = 1.52E+09
Is = 5.7E+08
α2 = Ib/Is
α2 2.670758
For L section
Ib1 = 1.31E+09
Ib2 = 6.82E+08
Ib = 1.99E+09 mm^4
Is = 3.13E+08 mm^4
α4 = Ib/Is
α4 6.350844
αfm = α1+ α2(2) +α3
4
average α 125
αfm = 8.070124
SHORT EXT BEAM
8
Moment = 39.32944 kN - m
Factor
M(-) int 0.7 (M)(factor)= 27.53061 kN - m
M(+) 0.5 (M)(factor)= 19.66472 kN - m
M(-)ext 0.3 (M)(factor)= 11.79883 kN - m
Column Strip
= 0.25*S = 875 mm
Factor Mcol
M(-) int 66.42857 M(-) x(factor)
= 18.28819 kN - m
M(+) 66.42857 M(+) x(factor)
= 13.06299 kN - m
M(-)ext 82.73537 M(+) x(factor)
= 10.42758 kN - m
M(-) int 15.54496 kN - m M(-) int 2.743229 kN - m
M(+) 11.10354 kN - m M(+) 1.959449 kN - m
M(-)ext 8.863446 kN - m M(-)ext 1.564137 kN - m
Middle Strip
= L- 0.5*S = 2750 mm
MIDDLE STRIP
M(-) int = M(-) - Mcol(-)
= 9.242419 kN - m
M(+) = M(+) - Mcol(+)
= 6.601728 kN - m
M(-)ext = M(+) - Mcol(+)
= 1.371249 kN - m
LONG EXT BEAM α(l2/l1) 1.047673
8
Moment = 54.18909
Factor
M(-) int 0.7 (M)(factor)= 37.93236 kN - m
M(+) 0.5 (M)(factor)= 27.09454 kN - m
M(-)ext 0.3 (M)(factor)= 16.25673 kN - m
Column Strip 0.25*l = 1125 mm
Factor Moment
M(-) int 81.66667 M(-) x(factor)
= 30.9781 kN - m
M(+) 81.66667 M(+) x(factor)
= 22.12721 kN - m
M(-)ext 92.13238 M(+) x(factor)
= 14.97771 kN - m
M(-) int 26.33138 kN - m M(-) int 4.646714 kN - m
M(+) 18.80813 kN - m M(+) 3.319082 kN - m
M(-)ext 12.73105 kN - m M(-)ext 2.246656 kN - m
Middle Strip
= S-0.5L = 1250 mm
MIDDLE STRIP
M(-) int = M(-) - Mcol(-)
= 6.954266 kN - m
M(+) = M(+) - Mcol(+)
= 4.967333 kN - m
M(-)ext = M(+) - Mcol(+)
= 1.279017 kN - m 126
SAMPLE FOR COMPUTATION OF NO. OF BARS ( SAME PROCESS IN ALL CASES )
Design of Short Middle Strip (@ positive moment)
Moment Capacity: Spacing
ASSUME 1m STRIP Spacing Ab*(1000)
b = 1000 mm As
Bar Diameter
= 12 mm Spacing 186.6853 ≈ 186mm
Clear cover= 119 mm
d = t - 0.5(bar diameter) - 25 Spacing requirements:
d = 94 mm
Mu = 13.19665 kN-m Spacing < 3t (mm) 375 OK!
Assume Mu= Mcap < 450 OK!
13.19665 = φf'cbd^2ω(1-0.59ω)
Solve for ω by quadratic equation
a = 0.59 Resulting Design:
b = -1 t = 150 mm
c = 0.03698 6 pcs. of 12 mm
aω^2+bω+c = 0 bar diameter
ω = 0.037824 Spacing = 186 mm O.C.
ρ = 0.003851 say 175 mm O.C.
As = ρbd
= 458.2929 mm^2
No. of Bars= As
Ab
No. of Bars= 5
Check the design
d(act) = 119 mm
No of 12mm bars 5
ρ(act) = As
bd
ρ(act) = 0.004752
ρmin = 1.4
fy
ρmin = 0.005091 < ρ(act) NOT OK!
Therefore, use ρ= 0.005091 ω= 0.05
As = 605.8182
No. of Bars= As
Ab
No. of Bars = 5 12mm diameter Bars per 1m
Mcap = 17.3165
Mcap > Mu Design is safe! 127
Appendix E: Estimate of Trade-off 1
COST AND MAN-HOUR ESTIMATE COMPUTATION
CONCRETE WORKS
2ND FLOOR - 5TH FLOOR
SLABS LENGTH (m) WIDTH (m)THICKNESS (m)QUANTITY VOLUME CEMENT (bags)
SLAB-1 4.5 3.5 0.125 48 94.50 1134.00
SLAB-2 4.5 2.5 0.125 32 45.00 540.00
SLAB-3 4.75 4.5 0.125 4 10.69 128.25
SLAB-4 4.205 2.25 0.125 4 4.73 56.77
SLAB-5 2.25 2.25 0.125 4 2.53 30.38
TOTAL QUANTITY 157.45 1889.39
SAND (cu.m)GRAVEL (cu.m)
94.50 189.00
45.00 90.00
10.69 21.38
4.73 9.46
2.53 5.06
157.45 314.90
ROOF-DECK
SLABS LENGTH (m) WIDTH (m)THICKNESS (m)QUANTITY
VOLUME (cu.m)
CEMENT (bags)
SLAB-1 4.5 3.5 0.125 12 23.625 283.5
SLAB-2 4.5 2.5 0.125 8 11.25 135
SLAB-3 4.75 4.5 0.125 1 2.671875 32.0625
SLAB-4 4.205 2.25 0.125 1 1.18265625 14.191875
SLAB-5 2.25 2.25 0.125 1 0.6328125 7.59375
TOTAL QUANTITY
39.3623438 472.34813
SAND (cu.m)GRAVEL (cu.m)
23.625 47.25
11.25 22.5
2.671875 5.34375
1.1826563 2.3653125
0.6328125 1.265625
39.362344 78.7246875
ITEM UNIT TOTAL UNIT COSTTOTAL COST

CEMENT bags 2361.74063 235 555009.047
SAND cu.m 196.811719 850 167289.961
GRAVEL cu.m 393.623438 1000 393623.438
TOTAL COST FOR SLAB 1115922.45
128
GROUND FLOOR TO 5TH FLOOR GROUND FLOOR TO
COLUMNS HEIGHT (m) WIDTH (m) LENGTH (m) QUANTITY VOLUME (cu.m) CEMENT (bags) COLUMNS
COLUMN-1 17.2 0.35 0.35 6 12.642 151.704 COLUMN-1
COLUMN-2 17.2 0.35 0.35 10 21.07 252.84 COLUMN-2
COLUMN-3 17.2 0.35 0.35 4 8.428 101.136 COLUMN-3
SAND (cu.m) GRAVEL (cu.m) Area SAND (cu.m)
12.642 25.284 144.48 12.642
21.07 42.14 240.8 21.07
8.428 16.856 96.32 8.428
42.14 84.28 481.6 42.14
ITEM UNIT TOTAL UNIT COST TOTAL COST ITEM

CEMENT bags 505.68 235 118834.8 CEMENT
SAND cu.m 42.14 850 35819 SAND
GRAVEL cu.m 84.28 1000 84280 GRAVEL
TOTAL COST FOR COLUMN 238933.8 TO
2ND FLOOR - ROOF DECK 2ND FLOOR - ROO

BEAMS LENGTH (m) WIDTH (m)THICKNESS (m)QUANTITY VOLUME (cu.m) CEMENT (bags) BEAMS
B-1 4.5 0.3 0.4 7 3.78 45.36 B-1
B-2 4.205 0.3 0.4 1 0.5046 6.0552 B-2
B-3 2.25 0.3 0.4 1 0.27 3.24 B-3
CB-1 2.25 0.3 0.5 1 0.3375 4.05 CB-1
G-1 4.5 0.3 0.4 8 4.32 51.84 G-1
G-2 4.5 0.3 0.4 8 4.32 51.84 G-2
G-3 4.5 0.3 0.4 7 3.78 45.36 G-3
G-3a 4.5 0.3 0.4 1 0.54 6.48 G-3a
G-4 2.5 0.3 0.4 2 0.6 7.2 G-4
G-5 7 0.3 0.4 2 1.68 20.16 G-5
G-6 2.5 0.3 0.4 7 2.1 25.2 G-6
G-7 7 0.3 0.4 7 5.88 70.56 G-7
RB-1 4.5 0.3 0.4 1 0.54 6.48 RB-1
RB-2 7 0.3 0.4 1 0.84 10.08 RB-2
RB-3 4.75 0.3 0.4 1 0.57 6.84 RB-3
RB-4 2.25 0.3 0.4 3 0.81 9.72 RB-4
129
SAND (cu.m) GRAVEL (cu.m) Area
3.78 7.56 44.1
0.5046 1.0092 5.887
0.27 0.54 3.15
0.3375 0.675 3.6
4.32 8.64 50.4
4.32 8.64 50.4
3.78 7.56 44.1
0.54 1.08 6.3
0.6 1.2 7
1.68 3.36 19.6
2.1 4.2 24.5
5.88 11.76 68.6
0.54 1.08 6.3
0.84 1.68 9.8
0.57 1.14 6.65
0.81 1.62 9.45
20.1321 40.2642 350.387
ITEM UNIT TOTAL UNIT COST TOTAL COST
CEMENT bags 241.5852 235 56772.522
SAND cu.m 20.1321 850 17112.285
GRAVEL cu.m 48.9042 1000 48904.2
TOTAL COST FOR BEAM 122789.007
REBARS
2ND FLOOR - 5TH FLOOR COLUMN STRIP (S)
SLAB LONGER (m) SHORTER (m) EXT INT POS
S-1 (INT) 4.5 3.5 ` 10 10
S-1 (LONG EDGE) 4.5 3.5 10 10 10 S-1 (LO
S-1 (SHORT EDGE) 4.5 3.5 10 10 10 S-1 (SH
S-1 (CORNER) 4.5 3.5 10 10 10
S-2 (CORNER) 4.5 2.5 10 10 10
S-2 ( LONG EDGE) 4.5 2.5 10 10 10 S-2 ( LO
S-3 4.75 4.5 10 10 10
S-4 4.205 2.25 10 10 10
S-5 2.25 2.25 10 10 10
MIDDLE STRIP (S) COLUMN STRIP (L)
EXT INT POS EXT INT POS MIDDL
7 7 5 8 8 8
5 7 6 8 8 8
10 10 6 8 8 8
5 11 9 8 8 8
5 5 5 8 8 8
5 5 5 8 8 8
5 11 9 8 8 8
5 11 9 8 8 8 130
5 5 5 8 8 8
MIDDLE STRIP (L) MIDD
EXT INT POS QUANTITY DEV LENGTH TOTAL LENGTH AREA EXT
6 6 4 5 0.3 1221.84375 78.75 6
9 9 5 5 0.3 1357.96875 78.75 9
6 4 5 1 0.3 271.59375 15.75 6
4 10 8 1 0.3 298.81875 15.75 4
4 7 6 2 0.3 359.1375 22.5 4
6 6 4 6 0.3 1056.9375 67.5 6
4 10 8 1 0.3 383.896875 21.375 4
4 10 8 1 0.3 203.7014063 9.46125 4
4 4 4 1 0.3 99.8578125 5.0625 4
TOTAL 5253.756094 314.89875
thickness formwork area thickness
0.125 88.75 0.125
0.125 88.75 0.125
0.125 17.75 0.125
0.125 17.75 0.125
0.125 26 0.125
0.125 78 0.125
0.125 23.6875 0.125
0.125 11.075 0.125
0.125 6.1875 0.125
357.95
ITEM TOTAL LENGTHUNIT LENGTH UNIT UNIT COST TOTAL COST WEIGHT ITEM
12mm-Ø 26268.78047 6 4378.1301 150 656719.5117 23326.67706 12mm-Ø
G.I. Tie Wire 745.68024 70 52197.6168 G.I. Tie Wire
TOTAL COST FOR SLABS 708917.1285
COLUMN COLUMN
COLUMNS HEIGHT (m) NO OF BARS QUANTITYTOTAL LENGTH DIAMETER WEIGHT (kg/m) COLUMNS
COLUMN-1 17.2 12 4 825.6 32mm- Ø 3.85 COLUMN-1
TIE LENGTH TIE SPACING NO. TIES TOTAL LENGTH TIE LENGTH
1.16 350 200.5714286 232.66286 1.16
1.16 350 802.2857143 930.65143 1.16
1.16 350 351 407.16 1.16
1570.4743
ITEM TOTAL LENGTHUNIT LENGTH UNIT UNIT COST TOTAL COST WEIGHT (kg) ITEM
32mm- Ø 4747.2 6 791.2 800 632960 29954.832 32mm- Ø
25mm- Ø 825.6 6 137.6 625 86000 3178.56 25mm- Ø
TIES (12mm- Ø) 1570.474286 6 261.74571 150 39261.85714 1394.581166 TIES (12mm- Ø)
TOTAL COST FOR COLUMNS 766804.8005 34527.97317
131
MIDDLE STRIP (L) EXT
EXT INT POS QUANTITY DEV LENGTH TOTAL LENGTH AREA 6
6 6 4 20 0.3 4887.375 315 9
9 9 5 20 0.3 5431.875 315 6
6 4 5 4 0.3 1086.375 63 4
4 10 8 4 0.3 1195.275 63 4
4 7 6 8 0.3 1436.55 90 6
6 6 4 24 0.3 4227.75 270 4
4 10 8 4 0.3 1535.5875 85.5 4
4 10 8 4 0.3 814.805625 37.845 4
4 4 4 4 0.3 399.43125 20.25
TOTAL 21015.02438 1259.595 thickness
thickness formwork area 0.125
0.125 355 0.125
0.125 355 0.125
0.125 71 0.125
0.125 71 0.125
0.125 104 0.125
0.125 312 0.125
0.125 94.75 0.125
0.125 44.3 0.125
0.125 24.75
1431.8 ROOF DEC
ROOF DECK COLUMN STRIP (S) SLAB
SLAB LONGER (m) SHORTER (m) EXT INT POS S-1 (INT)
S-1 (INT) 4.5 3.5 10 10 10 S-1 (LONG EDGE)
S-1 (LONG EDGE) 4.5 3.5 10 10 10 S-1 (SHORT EDGE)
S-1 (SHORT EDGE) 4.5 3.5 10 10 10 S-1 (CORNER)
S-1 (CORNER) 4.5 3.5 10 10 10 S-2 (CORNER)
S-2 (CORNER) 4.5 2.5 10 10 10 S-2 ( LONG EDGE)
S-2 ( LONG EDGE) 4.5 2.5 10 10 10 S-3
S-3 4.75 4.5 10 10 10 S-4
S-4 4.205 2.25 10 10 10 S-5
S-5 2.25 2.25 10 10 10 MIDDLE STRI
MIDDLE STRIP (S) COLUMN STRIP (L) EXT
EXT INT POS EXT INT POS 7
7 7 5 8 8 8 5
5 7 6 8 8 8 10
10 10 6 8 8 8 5
5 11 9 8 8 8 5
5 5 5 8 8 8 5
5 5 5 8 8 8 5
5 11 9 8 8 8 5
5 11 9 8 8 8 5
5 5 5 8 8 8
132
MIDDLE STRIP (L) MIDD
EXT INT POS QUANTITY DEV LENGTH TOTAL LENGTH AREA EXT
6 6 4 5 0.3 1221.84375 78.75 6
9 9 5 5 0.3 1357.96875 78.75 9
6 4 5 1 0.3 271.59375 15.75 6
4 10 8 1 0.3 298.81875 15.75 4
4 7 6 2 0.3 359.1375 22.5 4
6 6 4 6 0.3 1056.9375 67.5 6
4 10 8 1 0.3 383.896875 21.375 4
4 10 8 1 0.3 203.7014063 9.46125 4
4 4 4 1 0.3 99.8578125 5.0625 4
TOTAL 5253.756094 314.89875
thickness formwork area thickness
0.125 88.75 0.125
0.125 88.75 0.125
0.125 17.75 0.125
0.125 17.75 0.125
0.125 26 0.125
0.125 78 0.125
0.125 23.6875 0.125
0.125 11.075 0.125
0.125 6.1875 0.125
357.95
ITEM TOTAL LENGTHUNIT LENGTH UNIT UNIT COST TOTAL COST WEIGHT ITEM
12mm-Ø 26268.78047 6 4378.1301 150 656719.5117 23326.67706 12mm-Ø
COLUMN COLUMN
COLUMNS HEIGHT (m) NO OF BARS QUANTITYTOTAL LENGTH DIAMETER WEIGHT (kg/m) COLUMNS
TIE LENGTH TIE SPACING NO. TIES TOTAL LENGTH TIE LENGTH
1.16 350 200.5714286 232.66286 1.16
1.16 350 802.2857143 930.65143 1.16
1.16 350 351 407.16 1.16
1570.4743
32mm- Ø 4747.2 6 791.2 800 632960 29954.832 32mm- Ø
25mm- Ø 825.6 6 137.6 625 86000 3178.56 25mm- Ø
TIES (12mm- Ø) 1570.474286 6 261.74571 150 39261.85714 1394.581166 TIES (12mm- Ø)
133
SUPPORTS MIDSPAN
BEAMS LENGTH (m) QUANTITY BOTTOM TOP TOP BOTTOM BEAMS
B-1 4.5 7 2 7 2 5 B-1
B-2 4.205 1 2 7 2 5 B-2
B-3 2.25 1 2 7 2 5 B-3
CB- 1 2.25 1 2 7 2 5 CB- 1
G-1 4.5 8 2 7 2 5 G-1
G-2 4.5 8 2 7 2 5 G-2
G-3 4.5 7 2 7 2 5 G-3
G-3a 4.5 1 2 7 2 5 G-3a
G-4 2.5 2 2 7 2 5 G-4
G-5 7 2 2 7 2 5 G-5
G-6 2.5 7 2 7 2 5 G-6
G-7 7 7 2 7 2 5 G-7
RB-1 4.5 1 2 7 2 5 RB-1
RB-2 7 1 2 7 2 5 RB-2
RB-3 4.75 1 2 7 2 5 RB-3
RB-4 2.25 3 2 7 2 5 RB-4
DIAMETER WEIGHT (kg/m)TOTAL LENGTH
TOTAL WEIGHTTIE LENGTH TIE SPACING NO. TIES DIAMETER
25 6.31 252 1590.12 1.16 50 637 25
25 3.85 33.64 129.514 1.16 50 85.1 25
25 3.85 18 69.3 1.16 50 46 25
25 6.31 18 113.58 1.16 50 46 25
25 3.85 288 1108.8 1.16 50 728 25
25 3.85 288 1108.8 1.16 50 728 25
25 6.31 252 1590.12 1.16 50 637 25
25 3.85 36 138.6 1.16 50 91 25
25 3.85 40 154 1.16 50 102 25
25 6.31 112 706.72 1.16 50 282 25
25 2.98 140 417.2 1.16 50 357 25
25 2.98 392 1168.16 1.16 50 987 25
25 3.682272727 36 132.56182 1.16 50 91 25
25 3.552622378 56 198.94685 1.16 50 141 25
25 3.422972028 38 130.07294 1.16 50 96 25
25 3.293321678 54 177.83937 1.16 50 138 25
134
TOTAL LENGTHFOR GI TIE WIRE TOTAL LENGTH
738.92 5733 738.92
98.716 765.9 98.716
53.36 414 53.36
53.36 414 53.36
844.48 6552 844.48
844.48 6552 844.48
738.92 5733 738.92
105.56 819 105.56
118.32 918 118.32
327.12 2538 327.12
414.12 3213 414.12
1144.92 8883 1144.92
105.56 819 105.56
163.56 1269 163.56
111.36 864 111.36
160.08 1242 160.08
5862.756 45486.9 5862.756
32mm- Ø 634 6 105.66667 800 84533.33333 4000.54 32mm- Ø
25mm- Ø 703.64 6 117.27333 625 73295.83333 2709.014 25mm- Ø
22mm- Ø 662 6 110.33333 400 44133.33333 1972.76 22mm- Ø
TIES (12mm- Ø) 5862.756 6 977.126 150 146568.9 5206.127328 TIES (12mm- Ø)
TOTAL COST FOR BEAMS 372562.2151 13888.44133
SUMMARY OF ESTIMATE
CONCRETE REBARS TOTAL
SLAB 1115922.445 708917.13 1824839.574
BEAM 122789.007 372562.22 495351.2221
COLUMN 238933.8 766804.8 1005738.601
FORMWORKS 917607.95
LABOR 3852748.337
TOTAL 8096285.683
Total Unit Cost per Labor (php)

Total Cost
Concreting 269.0138188 m3 500 134506.9094 Concreting
Steel Works 71743.09155 kg 50 3587154.577 Steel Works
Formworks 2621.737 m2 50 131086.85 Formworks
TOTAL 3852748.337 TOTAL
135
LABOR COST LABOR COST
CONCRETE WORKS CONCRETE WORKS
TOTAL VOLUMECONCRETING NO. OF LABORERS
DURATION
(MAN HOURS) TOTAL VOLUME
269.0138188 317.72135
STEEL WORKS STEEL WORKS
TOTAL WEIGHT REINF. NO. OF LABORERS (MAN HOURS) TOTAL WEIGHT
71743.09155 73913.67005
FORMWORKS AREA COST PER AREATOTAL COST FORMWORKS

SLAB 1789.75 350 626412.5 SLAB
BEAM 350.387 350 122635.45 BEAM
COLUMN 481.6 350 168560 COLUMN
TOTAL 2621.737 917607.95 TOTAL
TOTAL UNIT PRODUCTIVITY RATE/HR

TOTAL MANHOURS
INSTALLATION OF FORWORKS 2621.737 m2 5 524.3474 INSTALLATI
REBAR INSTALLATION 71743.092 kg 15 4782.87277 REBAR
CONCRETE POURING 269.01382 m3 3 89.67127292 CONCR
REMOVING OF FORMWORKS 2621.737 m2 10 262.1737 REMOVING
TOTAL (HRS) 5659.065143 TO
TOTAL DURATION (MONTHS) 8 TOTAL DUR
ESTIMATE OF FACTOR SAFETY
FORMULA:
FACTOR OF SAFETY FOR BEAMS:

TRADE- OFF 1:
FACTOR OF SAFETY (M-) 1.209854295
FACTOR OF SAFETY (M+) 1.495358293
AVERAGE 1.352606294
136
FACTOR OF SAFETY FOR COLUMNS:
TRADE-OFF 1:
FACTOR OF
SAFETY:
1.117288773
OVERALL FACTOR OF SAFETY = AVERAGE OF ALL FACTORS FOR EACH TRADE-OFF

TRADE-OFF 1: 1.2348
Summary of Estimate

SLAB 1115922.45 708917.129 1824840
BEAM 122789.007 372562.215 495351.2
Cost COLUMN 238933.8 766804.801 1005739
FORMWORKS 917608
LABOR 3852748
TOTAL 8096286
BEAM 1.35260629 TOTAL
Factor of safety
COLUMN 1.11728877 1.2348
TOTAL MANHOURS
INSTALLATION OF FORWORKS 524.3474
REBAR INSTALLATION 4782.873
MAN HOURS CONCRETE POURING 89.67127
REMOVING OF FORMWORKS 262.1737
TOTAL (HRS) 5659.065
TOTAL DURATION (MONTHS) 8
137
Appendix F: Estimate of Trade-off 2
COST AND MAN-HOUR ESTIMATE COMPUTATION
CONCRETE WORKS
2ND FLOOR - 5TH FLOOR
VOLUME (cu.m)
CEMENT (bags)
SLAB-1 4.5 3.5 0.15 48 113.40 1360.80
SLAB-2 4.5 2.5 0.15 32 54.00 648.00
SLAB-3 4.75 4.5 0.15 4 12.83 153.90
SLAB-4 4.205 2.25 0.15 4 5.68 68.12
SLAB-5 2.25 2.25 0.15 4 3.04 36.45
SAND (cu.m) GRAVEL (cu.m)
113.40 226.80
54.00 108.00
12.83 25.65
5.68 11.35
3.04 6.08
188.94 377.88
ROOF-DECK
VOLUME (cu.m)
CEMENT (bags)
SLAB-1 4.5 3.5 0.15 12 28.35 340.2
SLAB-2 4.5 2.5 0.15 8 13.5 162
SLAB-3 4.75 4.5 0.15 1 3.20625 38.475
SLAB-4 4.205 2.25 0.15 1 1.4191875 17.03025
SLAB-5 2.25 2.25 0.15 1 0.759375 9.1125
TOTAL QUANTITY 47.2348125 566.81775
SAND (cu.m) GRAVEL (cu.m)
28.35 56.7
13.5 27
3.20625 6.4125
1.4191875 2.838375
0.759375 1.51875
47.2348125 94.469625

CEMENT bags 2834.08875 235 666010.9
SAND cu.m 236.174063 850 200748
GRAVEL cu.m 472.348125 1000 472348.1
TOTAL COST FOR SLAB 1339107
138
GROUND FLOOR TO 5TH FLOOR
COLUMNS HEIGHT (m) WIDTH (m) LENGTH (m) QUANTITYVOLUME (cu.m)CEMENT (bags)
COLUMN-1 17.2 0.35 0.35 6 12.642 151.704
COLUMN-2 17.2 0.35 0.35 10 21.07 252.84
COLUMN-3 17.2 0.35 0.35 4 8.428 101.136
12.642 25.284 144.48
21.07 42.14 240.8
8.428 16.856 96.32
42.14 84.28 481.6

CEMENT bags 505.68 235 118834.8
SAND cu.m 42.14 850 35819
GRAVEL cu.m 84.28 1000 84280
TOTAL COST FOR COLUMN 238933.8
2ND FLOOR - ROOF DECK

BEAMS LENGTH (m) WIDTH (m) THICKNESS (m)QUANTITYVOLUME (cu.m)CEMENT (bags)
B-1 4.5 0.35 0.45 7 4.96125 59.535
B-2 4.205 0.35 0.45 1 0.6622875 7.94745
B-3 2.25 0.35 0.45 1 0.354375 4.2525
CB-1 2.25 0.35 0.5 1 0.39375 4.725
G-1 4.5 0.35 0.45 8 5.67 68.04
G-2 4.5 0.35 0.45 8 5.67 68.04
G-3 4.5 0.35 0.45 7 4.96125 59.535
G-3a 4.5 0.35 0.45 1 0.70875 8.505
G-4 2.5 0.35 0.45 2 0.7875 9.45
G-5 7 0.35 0.45 2 2.205 26.46
G-6 2.5 0.35 0.45 7 2.75625 33.075
G-7 7 0.35 0.45 7 7.7175 92.61
RB-1 4.5 0.35 0.45 1 0.70875 8.505
RB-2 7 0.35 0.45 1 1.1025 13.23
RB-3 4.75 0.35 0.45 1 0.748125 8.9775
RB-4 2.25 0.35 0.45 3 1.063125 12.7575
TOTAL QUANTITY 39.4072875 316.48995
139
4.96125 9.9225 50.4
0.6622875 1.324575 6.728
0.354375 0.70875 3.6
0.39375 0.7875 3.825
5.67 11.34 57.6
5.67 11.34 57.6
4.96125 9.9225 50.4
0.70875 1.4175 7.2
0.7875 1.575 8
2.205 4.41 22.4
2.75625 5.5125 28
7.7175 15.435 78.4
0.70875 1.4175 7.2
1.1025 2.205 11.2
0.748125 1.49625 7.6
1.063125 2.12625 10.8
26.3741625 52.748325 400.153
CEMENT bags 316.48995 235 74375.14
SAND cu.m 26.3741625 850 22418.04
GRAVEL cu.m 64.088325 1000 64088.33
TOTAL COST FOR BEAM 160881.5
REBARS
2ND FLOOR - 5TH FLOOR COLUMN STRIP (S)
S-1 (INT) 4.5 3.5 10 10 10
S-1 (LONG EDGE) 4.5 3.5 10 10 10
S-1 (SHORT EDGE) 4.5 3.5 10 10 10
S-1 (CORNER) 4.5 3.5 10 10 10
S-2 (CORNER) 4.5 2.5 10 10 10
S-2 ( LONG EDGE) 4.5 2.5 10 10 10
S-3 4.75 4.5 10 10 10
S-4 4.205 2.25 10 10 10
S-5 2.25 2.25 10 10 10

EXT INT POS EXT INT POS
7 7 5 8 8 8
5 7 6 8 8 8
10 10 6 8 8 8
5 11 9 8 8 8
5 5 5 8 8 8
5 5 5 8 8 8
5 11 9 8 8 8
5 11 9 8 8 8
5 5 5 8 8 8
140
MIDDLE STRIP (L)
EXT INT POS QUANTITY DEV LENGTH
TOTAL LENGTH AREA
6 6 4 20 0.3 4887.375 315
9 9 5 20 0.3 5431.875 315
6 4 5 4 0.3 1086.375 63
4 10 8 4 0.3 1195.275 63
4 7 6 8 0.3 1436.55 90
6 6 4 24 0.3 4227.75 270
4 10 8 4 0.3 1535.5875 85.5
4 10 8 4 0.3 814.805625 37.845
4 4 4 4 0.3 399.43125 20.25
21015.02438 1259.595
thickness formwork area
0.125 355
0.125 355
0.125 71
0.125 71
0.125 104
0.125 312
0.125 94.75
0.125 44.3
0.125 24.75
1431.8
ROOF DECK COLUMN STRIP (S)
S-1 (INT) 4.5 3.5 10 10 10
S-1 (LONG EDGE) 4.5 3.5 10 10 10
S-1 (SHORT EDGE) 4.5 3.5 10 10 10
S-1 (CORNER) 4.5 3.5 10 10 10
S-2 (CORNER) 4.5 2.5 10 10 10
S-2 ( LONG EDGE) 4.5 2.5 10 10 10
S-3 4.75 4.5 10 10 10
S-4 4.205 2.25 10 10 10
S-5 2.25 2.25 10 10 10
EXT INT POS EXT INT POS
7 7 5 8 8 8
5 7 6 8 8 8
10 10 6 8 8 8
5 11 9 8 8 8
5 5 5 8 8 8
5 5 5 8 8 8
5 11 9 8 8 8
5 11 9 8 8 8
5 5 5 8 8 8
141
MIDDLE STRIP (L)
EXT INT POS QUANTITY DEV LENGTHTOTAL LENGTHAREA
6 6 4 5 0.3 1221.84375 78.75
9 9 5 5 0.3 1357.96875 78.75
6 4 5 1 0.3 271.59375 15.75
4 10 8 1 0.3 298.81875 15.75
4 7 6 2 0.3 359.1375 22.5
6 6 4 6 0.3 1056.9375 67.5
4 10 8 1 0.3 383.896875 21.375
4 10 8 1 0.3 203.7014063 9.46125
4 4 4 1 0.3 99.8578125 5.0625
5253.756094 314.89875
thickness formwork area
0.125 88.75
0.125 88.75
0.125 17.75
0.125 17.75
0.125 26
0.125 78
0.125 23.6875
0.125 11.075
0.125 6.1875
357.95
ITEM TOTAL LENGTH UNIT LENGTH UNIT UNIT COST TOTAL COST WEIGHT
12mm-Ø 26268.78047 6 4378.130078 150 656719.5117 23326.67706
G.I. Tie Wire 745.68024 70 52197.6168
COLUMN
COLUMNS HEIGHT (m) NO OF BARS QUANTITYTOTAL LENGTHDIAMETER WEIGHT (kg/m)
COLUMN-1 17.2 12 4 825.6 32mm- Ø 3.85
COLUMN-2 17.2 12 16 3302.4 25mm- Ø 6.31
COLUMN-3 17.2 12 7 1444.8 25mm- Ø 6.31
TIE LENGTH TIE SPACING NO. TIES TOTAL LENGTH
1.16 350 200.5714286 232.6628571
1.16 350 802.2857143 930.6514286
1.16 350 351 407.16
1570.474286
ITEM TOTAL LENGTH UNIT LENGTH UNIT UNIT COST TOTAL COST WEIGHT (kg)
32mm- Ø 4747.2 6 791.2 800 632960 29954.832
25mm- Ø 825.6 6 137.6 625 86000 3178.56
TIES (12mm- Ø) 1570.474286 6 261.7457143 150 39261.85714 1394.581166
G.I. Tie Wire 122.6134771 70 8582.943396
142
SUPPORTS MIDSPAN
BEAMS LENGTH (m) QUANTITY BOTTOM TOP TOP BOTTOM
B-1 4.5 7 2 9 2 7
B-2 4.205 1 2 9 2 7
B-3 2.25 1 2 9 2 7
CB- 1 2.25 1 2 9 2 7
G-1 4.5 8 2 9 2 7
G-2 4.5 8 2 9 2 7
G-3 4.5 7 2 9 2 7
G-3a 4.5 1 2 9 2 7
G-4 2.5 2 2 9 2 7
G-5 7 2 2 9 2 7
G-6 2.5 7 2 9 2 7
G-7 7 7 2 9 2 7
RB-1 4.5 1 2 9 2 7
RB-2 7 1 2 9 2 7
RB-3 4.75 1 2 9 2 7
RB-4 2.25 3 2 9 2 7
DIAMETER WEIGHT (kg/m) TOTAL LENGTHTOTAL WEIGHTTIE LENGTH TIE SPACING NO. TIES
25 6.31 315 1987.65 1.16 50 637
25 3.85 42.05 161.8925 1.16 50 85.1
25 3.85 22.5 86.625 1.16 50 46
25 6.31 22.5 141.975 1.16 50 46
25 3.85 360 1386 1.16 50 728
25 3.85 360 1386 1.16 50 728
25 6.31 315 1987.65 1.16 50 637
25 3.85 45 173.25 1.16 50 91
25 3.85 50 192.5 1.16 50 102
25 6.31 140 883.4 1.16 50 282
25 2.98 175 521.5 1.16 50 357
25 2.98 490 1460.2 1.16 50 987
25 3.682272727 45 165.7022727 1.16 50 91
25 3.552622378 70 248.6835664 1.16 50 141
25 3.422972028 47.5 162.5911713 1.16 50 96
25 3.293321678 67.5 222.2992133 1.16 50 138
143
TOTAL LENGTH FOR GI TIE WIRE
738.92 7007
98.716 936.1
53.36 506
53.36 506
844.48 8008
844.48 8008
738.92 7007
105.56 1001
118.32 1122
327.12 3102
414.12 3927
1144.92 10857
105.56 1001
163.56 1551
111.36 1056
160.08 1518
5862.756 55595.1
ITEM TOTAL LENGTH UNIT LENGTH UNIT UNIT COST TOTAL COST WEIGHT (kg)
32mm- Ø 792.5 6 132.0833333 800 105666.6667 5000.675
25mm- Ø 879.55 6 146.5916667 625 91619.79167 3386.2675
22mm- Ø 827.5 6 137.9166667 400 55166.66667 2465.95
TIES (12mm- Ø) 5862.756 6 977.126 150 146568.9 5206.127328
G.I. Tie Wire 419.5856604 70 29370.99623
TOTAL COST FOR BEAMS 428393.0212 16059.01983
SUMMARY OF ESTIMATE
SLAB 1339106.934 708917.1285 2048024
BEAM 160881.5014 428393.0212 589274.5
COLUMN 238933.8 766804.8005 1005739
FORMWORKS 935026.1
LABOR 3988119
TOTAL 8566183
Total Unit Cost per Labor (php)

Total Cost
Concreting 317.72135 m3 500 158860.7
Steel Works 73913.67005 kg 50 3695684
Formworks 2671.503 m2 50 133575.2
TOTAL 3988119
144
LABOR COST
CONCRETE WORKS
TOTAL VOLUME CONCRETING NO. OF LABORERS
DURATION
(MAN HOURS)
317.72135
STEEL WORKS
TOTAL WEIGHT REINF. NO. OF LABORERS (MAN HOURS)
73913.67005
FORMWORKS AREA COST PER AREA TOTAL COST

SLAB 1789.75 350 626412.5
BEAM 400.153 350 140053.55
COLUMN 481.6 350 168560
TOTAL 2671.503 935026.05
TOTAL MANHOURS TOTAL UNIT

PRODUCTIVITY RATE/HR
TOTAL MANHOURS
INSTALLATION OF FORWORKS 2671.503 m2 10 267.1503
REBAR INSTALLATION 73913.67005 kg 20 3695.683502
CONCRETE POURING 317.72135 m3 3 105.9071167
REMOVING OF FORMWORKS 2671.503 m2 10 267.1503
TOTAL (HRS) 4335.891219
ESTIMATE OF FACTOR OF SAFETY
FORMULA:
FACTOR OF SAFETY FOR BEAMS:

TRADE- OFF 2:
FACTOR OF SAFETY (M-) 1.429231653
FACOTR OF SAFETY (M+ ) 1.52706388
AVERAGE 1.478147767
145
FACTOR OF SAFETY FOR COLUMNS:
TRADE-OFF 2:
FACTOR OF
SAFETY
1.371677
OVERALL FACTOR OF SAFETY = AVERAGE OF ALL FACTORS FOR EACH TRADE-OFF

TRADE-OFF 2: 1.277
Summary of Estimate

SLAB 1339106.93 708917.129 2048024
BEAM 160881.501 428393.021 589274.5
Cost COLUMN 238933.8 766804.801 1005739
FORMWORKS 935026.1
LABOR 3988119
TOTAL 8566183
BEAM 1.47814777 TOTAL
Factor of safety
COLUMN 1.371677 1.277
TOTAL MANHOURS
INSTALLATION OF FORWORKS 267.1503
REBAR INSTALLATION 3695.684
MAN HOURS CONCRETE POURING 105.9071
REMOVING OF FORMWORKS 267.1503
TOTAL (HRS) 4335.891
146

Design of Concrete

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Design of Concrete

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

DESIGN OF A FIVE-STOREY DORMITORY BUILDING

1.1. Project Description

Figure 1-2. Project Location

1.5. Project Scope and Limitations

The project scope is composed of the following:

1.6. Project Development

FACTOR OF SAFETY FACTOR OF SAFETY

2.1. Description of the structure

6 Rooms from Gr. Floor to 5th Residential 31.5 m2

1 Room located in the Ground Canteen 22.5 m2

1 Room located in the Ground Guard Room 9 m2

1 Room Located at the Roof Machine Room 4.2 m2

Table 2-1. Room Classification with Floor Area

Figure 2-1. Ground Floor Plan

Figure 2-1.Roof Deck Plan

3.1. Design Constraints

Figure 3-1. Two- Way Slab with beams

Figure 3-2. Flat Plate

Computation of ranking for ability to satisfy criterion of materials:

𝑺𝒖𝒃𝒐𝒓𝒅𝒊𝒏𝒂𝒕𝒆𝒓𝒂𝒏𝒌 = 𝑮𝒐𝒗𝒆𝒓𝒏𝒊𝒏𝒈𝒓𝒂𝒏𝒌 − (% 𝒅𝒊𝒇𝒇𝒆𝒓𝒆𝒏𝒄𝒆)𝒙𝟏𝟎

3.3. Designer’s Raw Ranking

Criterion’s Importance Ability to satisfy the criterion

3.3.1.1. Economic Assessment

3.3.1.2. Safety Assessment

3.3.1.3. Constructability Assessment

3.3.3. Initial Estimate (Safety)

3.4. Design Standards

The National Building Code of the Philippines (PD 1096)

DEISGN OF STRUCTURAL MEMBERS

DESIGN OF BEAMS DESIGN OF SLAB DESIGN OF COLUMN

BEAM SCHEDULING SLAB SCHEDULING COLUMN SCHEDULING

The designing of Figure 4-1. Design Methodology structural members

4.2.1. Geometric Modeling

Figure 4-2.Typical Framing Plan for Trade-Off A

4.2.2. Material Properties

Beams 300 x 400 mm

Columns 400 x 400 mm

Table 4-2. Trial Dimension

Table 4-3.Gravity Loads

Table 4-4. Seismic Parameters

4.2.4.2 Live Load

4.2.4.3 Wind Load

Table 4-5. Wind Load Parameters

4.2.4.4 Primary Loads and Load Combinations

PRIMARY LOAD CASES

Table 4-6.Primary Load Cases

Table 4-7. Load Combinations

4.2.5.1 Primary Loadings

Figure 4-4. Dead Load

Figure 4-6. Earthquake Load at X

Figure 4-8. Wind Load at Windward X

Figure 4-10. Wind Load at Leeward X

4.2.6. Summary of Staad Results

Max. Axial Load (Fx) Moment at Y (My) Moment at Z (Mz)

4.2.7. Design of Structural Members (Two-Way Slab System with Beams)

Determine maximum and minimum steel percentage

Assume steel percentage in between maximum and minimum

Compute omega, then compute for the moment capacity

Check if moment capacity is greater than factored moment

Determine required steel area, then determine actual steel area

Determine required spacing of stirrups for shear

Figure 4-12. Flowchart for the design of beams

Stream of light Steel Reinforcements Bar