TECHNOLOGICAL INSTITUTE OF THE PHILIPPINES

`938 Aurora Boulevard, Cubao, Quezon City

COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING AND ARCHITECTURE

Civil Engineering Department

CE 506
CE Design Projects 1

SOIL STABILIZATION AND DESIGN OF AN EVACUATION CENTER AT LIBIS BULELAK, BRGY.

MALANDAY, MARIKINA CITY DUE TO CLAY RICH SOIL AND EXTREME LOAD

PREPARED BY:
CANDA, SHEENA GAY
CORDERO, DIANNE RACHELLE
DELA CRUZ, RONNEL
MANANSALA, ALYSSA
SORIANO, GERRYLYN
CE51FB2

SUBMITTED TO:
ENGR. RHONNIE ESTORES
Instructor

March 7, 2017
 CHAPTER 1: PROJECT BACKGROUND
1.1 The Project
Marikina City, being one of the cities in Metro Manila is well-known as the Shoe Capital of the
Philippines because of its notable shoe industry. One of its barangay – Brgy. Malanday is the largest
barangay of Marikina which includes the Libis Bulelak Homeowners Association that is located less than 10
meters away from the Marikina River. Based on the 2014 census of the Local Government of Marikina, Libis
Bulelak has the most number of households from a total of 31 homeowners association.

This project is the Soil stabilization and design of 5-storey Evacuation Building for the residence of
Libis Bulelak, Barangay Malanday, Marikina City. It will be constructed at Malaya Street in Marikina City to
have a temporary settlement for the evacuees. Marikina City is one of the most affected area when strong
typhoons struck the Luzon area most especially in the National Capital Region. The evacuation building will
help the barangay in rescuing the settlers near the Marikina River and guaranteed that the area will be safe
for flooding and other disasters.

The project aims to provide temporary shelter for the affected residence of Barangay Malanday of
the future flooding. The location is accessible to all necessities of the evacuees, like for example it is near
convenient stores and church. There is also nearby health center and hospital around the area.

The designers individually devised tradeoffs during the design process. Each option will be evaluated
in the project in order to choose the most efficient item based on the design objectives. The tradeoffs
presented will focus on the soil stabilization itself which are the Prefabricated Vertical Drains, Stone Columns,
Pile Embankments, and Geogrid Soil Reinforcement. The tradeoffs may vary from design cost, convenience,
design period of the structure, and construction time.
1.2 Project Location

1.3 The Client

The client of the project is Mr. Manuel Gumiran, President of the said homeowners association. He
aims to bring safety to all the residence of the Libis Bulelak, Brgy. Malanday, Marikina City.

1.4 Project Objectives

1.4.1 General Objectives
The primary objective of the project is to reinforce the soil and at the same time design a 5-storey
evacuation building for the residence of Libis Bulelak, Brgy. Malanday, Marikina City, with necessary and
adequate Structural members that can support its own weight and withstand unexpected natural disaster in
the future such as earthquake and to evaluate the influence of the multiple constraints such as economic,
safety, sustainability, and constructability which are the demands of the client in accordance with codes and
engineering standards.

1.4.2 Specific Objectives

1 To analyze the different effect caused by different loads and load combinations.
To Design an Earthquake Resilient Soft Story Building using the specification and standards of
National Building Code of the Philippines and National Structural Code of the Philippines.
2. To provide an efficient cost and estimate of the design.
3. To mitigate the failure of the structure in earthquake scenarios especially the soil capacity.
 4. To weigh-in the trade-offs based on the limitations in order to differentiate what is the most
effective design choice.

1.5 Scope and Limitation

1.5.1 Scope
The following were the scope of the design project:
1. Provide structural design plans to the client such as beam, column, slab, shear walls, Footings and
other structural member/elements schedules using the specification and standards of the National
Structural Code of the Philippines 2010.
2. Analyze the structure using STAADPro V8i software.
3. Provide structural drawings with structural member details.
4. Provide the cost and duration estimate of the project
5. Focus only on the design of the geotechnical and structural aspect of the soil and the building
respectively.

1.5.2 Limitation
The following were the limitations of the design project:

1. The Architectural, Plumbing, Mechanical and Electrical cost estimates were not included.
2. The interior design of the structure was not considered. Soil is the main focus in this study.
3. Only Structural Details like beams, slabs, columns, Shear walls, footings and other structural
elements/members were considered in the design.
4. The plumbing and electrical plans are not included in this design.
5. The project is for reinforced concrete structure only.

1. 6 Project Development
The completion of the design had undergone various stages as shown in Figure. Project
development will start on conceptualizing the structure want to construct by the owner. Second we need to
consider the multiple constrains, tradeoffs, and design standards. Third we need to check the location and
vicinity of the project. Fourth presentation of architectural plan with respect to the location, tradeoffs, building
code of the Philippines and multiple constrains. Fifth is the design stage, in this stage we present the framing
plan and structural plan of the project with respect to the different codes, specification, and requirement of
the National Structural Code of the Philippines 2010 and also the computation of the structure by the help of
different software like STAADPro V8i . Then last is the presentation of the final output of the design.

The flow chart will show the statement above.

 CHAPTER 2: DESIGN INPUTS

2.1 Description of the Structure

The said Evacuation Center will be located at Malaya Street, Barangay Malanday, Marikina City with
a total of 8 units per floor with one kitchen and a comfort room. Each unit will be composed of 3 double deck
beds that can occupy 4 households with an average of 4 family members.

Figure 2.1.a Evacuation Center Perspective

According (Regala, 2014), when typhoon yolanda strikes leyte, the government constructed
temporary shelters for the people in need. The table illustrated the different standard load used for
the structure. Herewith is the demonstration of the possible design standards and basis of variables
to be used for a 3-storey building.

Figure 2.1.b Structural Design Standars Relativity

According to (Rhodelynne Lagurin Cruz, n.d.), a 34-storey building is designed to be constructed in
Marikina. The tables shows the soil bearing capacity to be considered. This will be related to the
evacuation center’s soil test. Also the soil bearing capacity can be computed by interpulation.

Figure 2.1.c Site Analysis (Borehole 1)

Figure 2.1.d Site Analysis (Borehole 2)

Figure 2.1.e Site Analysis (Borehole 3)

2.2 Room Classification with Corresponding area

Room Description Area Quantity Total Area

(m2) (m2)
Rooms 23.5 80 1880
Comfort Room 45.9 5 229.5
Hallway 70.43 5 352.15
Kitchen 45.9 5 229.5
Table 2.2.1 Room Description

2.3 Design Loads

In classifying the structure, the designer will be using National Structural Code of the Philippines
(NSCP) 2010. In which per this, the proposed evacuation center building will be considered as
Standard Occupancy Structure with regards to occupancy category.

2.3.1 Dead Loads

Materials Design Load (kPa)

Ceramic or quarry tile (20mm) on 25mm mortar bed 1.10
Acoustical Fiber board 0.05
Mechanical duct allowance 0.2
Suspended steel channel system 0.1
Masonry Grout (Full) 0.11
CHB Wall (100mm) 2.11
CHB Wall (150mm) 2.73
Plaster (both sides) 0.48
Asphalt Shingles 0.1
Table 2.3.1.a Dead loads (in kPa)
 Material Density
(kN/cu.m)
Concrete 23.54
Glass 25.1
Aluminium 26.7
Table 2.3.1.b Dead loads (in kN/cu.m)

2.3.2 Live Loads

User or Occupancy Uniform Load (kPa)
Basic floor area 1.9
Roof Live Load 1.9
Table 2.3.2 Occupancy based

2.3.3 Earthquake Load Parameters

Parameters
Importance Factor 1
Soil Profile type Stiff soil profile (Type 4)
Seismic Zone Zone 4 (Z=0.4)
Seismic source type A
Near-Source Factor (Na) 1.16
Near-Source Factor (Nv) 1.52
Ct 0.0731
R (Special R.C Moment Resisting Frame) 8.5
R (Dual System) 8.5
Table 2.3.3 Earthquake Load Parameters
2.3.4 Wind Load Parameters
Parameters
Basic Wind Speed 200 kph
Exposure Category B
Building Classification Category II
Structure Type Building
Structure
Enclosure Classification Partially
Enclosed
Importance Factor 1
Table 2.3.4 Wind Load Parameters

2.3.5 Load Combinations

LOADS REQUIRED STRENGTH
DEAD LOAD (DL) AND LIVE LOAD (LL) 1.4DL
1.2DL + 1.6LL
DEAD LOAD (DL), LIVE LOAD (LL) AND WIND 1.2DL +1.0LL
LOAD (WL) 1.2DL + 0.8WL
1.2DL + 0.8WL + 1.0LL
0.9DL + 1.6WL
DEAD LAOD (DL), LIVE LOAD (LL), AND 1.2DL + 1.0LL + 1.0EL
EARTHQUAKE LOAD (EL) 0.9DL + 1.0EL
Table 2.3.5 Load Combinations
2.4 Architectural Plans
The structural design of the proposed Evacuation Center will conform to its Architectural plans
composed of its Floor plans and its elevation plans

Figure 2.4 Floor Plan in uniformity from First Floor to Fifth Floor
2.5 Related Literature
2.5.1 Assessment Of Damage Of Buildings Constructed In Expansive Soil Areas Of Addis Ababa

In his paper, (Sisay, 2014) states that the amount of damages caused by expansive soil is
tremendously high and alarming. These damages are mainly dominated in light weight-engineering
structures founded in expansive soils. These structures include lightweight buildings, roads, runways
and buried utilities. The problem associated with expansive soils is not yet properly solved. It is
important to assess buildings constructed in expansive soil areas in order to know the cause of
failure. This helps in providing solutions for newly constructed buildings and to get remedial
measures for those already damaged. Therefore, in this study an attempt was made to assess the
damage that occurred on buildings that are constructed on expansive soil areas by taking ninety six
randomly selected houses in the city of Addis Ababa. The houses are located in Bole, Olympia,
Nifasilk, Lafto, Old Airport, Mekanisa, Gergi and Bole bulbula localities of the city. The study showed
that 64 % of the houses suffered heavy damage, 8 % of the houses were slightly damaged and 28%
of the houses showed no damage. Analysis was made to understand the cause, extent and type of
damage that was observed in the houses. The damages that are observed are mainly caused by
poor design, construction and non-controlled drainage.

2.5.2 Design Of Stabilizing Foundation For One-Storey Office Building On Peat Soil

According to (IBRAHIM, 2008), peat soil is not suitable to be used as foundation for the construction
of building because of its low strength compared to other types of soil. Sarawak has a very wide area
of peat soil such as in Matang and Sibu. However, many researches have been done and innovation
like stone column, micro pile, dynamic compaction, soil nailing, earth reinforcement and others have
been made so that this land not be wasted. This project presents a foundation design system for one
storey building of peat soil for especially in Sarawak. The concept is used to decrease the cost for
building construction in peat soil areas. The designs used in this project are cement stabilizing, stone
column, micro pile, and prefabricated vertical drain. Further analysis on its safety is done to ensure
the design is safe to be used. This new design is based on the theory of foundation design and
abides to the guidelines provided by BS 6399:1196. These designs conceptual are found to be useful
and economic for the geotechnical engineer and contractor.
2.5.3 Design, Construction And Performance Of Buildings Foundations On Soft Clays In The Brisbane
Region

According to geotechnical assumptions and speculations, (Daly, 2010) aims to investigate the
problems associated with building foundations on soft clay soils in the Brisbane region. Four case
studies are also included as part of the project. Two of the projects are from within the Brisbane
region and two are from Malaysia. These are discussed in detail and the foundation techniques used
for these structures are compared along with the investigation techniques. This project appreciation
only covers issues with building foundations on naturally occurring soft soils. Artificially created soft
soils, such as tailings are not investigated as part of this project as they are not typically found in the
Brisbane region. Information is given in the background section detailing the various foundation
options available to structures founding in areas where soft clays are present. These are typically
grouped into either deep or high level foundations or ground improvements. Various soil tests used
on soft clays and their uses and advantages are also detailed. Comparisons are made between the
foundation techniques used for building founding on soft clays in the Brisbane region to those
techniques used elsewhere in the world. All soil classifications used in this thesis are in accordance
with AS1726 – Geotechnical Investigations.

2.5.4 Treatment And Improvement Of The Geotechnical Properties Of Different Soft Fine-Grained
Soils Using Chemical Stabilization

In general, fly ash (a by-product from the burning of coal in the electric power plants) is currently in
use for soil stabilization in some countries like USA, Japan, Scandinavian countries, India, and some
other countries and has several recommendations and regulations. In Germany, however, fly ash is
not used for soil-stabilization. The present study is an attempt to estimate how the use of fly ash
(from a local electric power plant at Lippendorf, South of Leipzig city, Saxony, Germany), hydrated
lime, and lime/fly ash could improve the geotechnical properties [including consistency limits,
compaction properties, unconfined compressive strength (qu), elasticity modulus (Esecant),
durability, California bearing ratio (CBR), indirect tensile strength (σt), and the hydraulic conductivity
(K-value)] of three different soft fine-grained soils [tertiary clay, organic silt, and weathered soil]
collected from Hallecity region, Saxony-Anhalt, Germany. One of the most significant objectives of
the present study is to use the ultrasonic p-wave velocity testing as non-destructive method to
evaluate the improvement of the geotechnical properties of the stabilized soils and to correlate the
 p-wave velocity values of the stabilized soils with the other geotechnical parameters (qu-, Esecant-,
CBR-, and σt-value). In addition, the study is designed to evaluate the effect of lime-, fly ash-, and
lime/fly ash-stabilization process on the microstructures and on the mineralogical composition of the
three studied soils using scanning electron microscope (SEM)- and X-ray diffraction (XRD)-analysis,
respectively. Furthermore, one of the objectives of this study is to estimate the heat flow of the soil-
chemical additive mixtures and their hydration reactions using calorimetry-analysis. This is from the
paper of (Ismaiel, 2006).

2.5.5 Stabilization Of Soft Clay Subgrades In Virginia Phase I Laboratory Study

(Geiman, 2005) thesis’ claims that many pavement subgrades in Virginia consist of wet, highly
plastic clay or other troublesome soils. Such soils can be treated with traditional lime and cement
stabilization methods. Alternatives, including lignosulfonates and polymers, are available, but their
performance record is mixed and solid engineering data is lacking, which prevents reliable design.
The goal of this research was to screen a suite of traditional and non-traditional stabilizers against
three Virginia soils that have caused problems during construction or resulted in poor performance
in service. The selected stabilizers were: quicklime, hydrated lime, pelletized lime, cement,
lignosulfonate, synthetic polymer, magnesium chloride, and a proprietary cementitious stabilizer. A
laboratory procedure was developed and applied to three Virginia soils obtained from Northern
Virginia, Staunton, and Lynchburg. Key findings from the research include that (1) traditional lime
and cement stabilizers were far more effective than liquid stabilizers (lignosulfonate, synthetic
polymer, and magnesium chloride) in increasing strength, (2) the liquid stabilizers were ineffective
on soils with high moisture content, (3) the proprietary cementitious stabilizer was more effective in
increasing strength than lime for all cases tested, but not was not as effective as the cement
stabilizer, (4) quicklime and hydrated lime increased workability of the soils although they did not
produce strengths comparable to cement, (5) the strength of soils stabilized with cement and the
proprietary cementitious stabilizer can be estimated based on the water-amendment ratio of the
mixture, and (6) the strength of soils stabilized with lime can be estimated based on a combination
of plasticity index and water-amendment ratio of the mixture.
2.5.6 Soil Stabilization Using Lime: Advantages, Disadvantages and Proposing a Potential
Alternative

This study from (Jawad, 2014) is an overview of previous studies on lime (quick and hydrated) -treated
soil. Lime is the oldest traditional stabilizer used for soil stabilization. The mechanism of soil-lime treatment
involves cation exchange, which leads to the flocculation and agglomeration of soil particles. The high pH
environment then causes a pozzolanic reaction between the free Ca+2 cations and the dissolved silica and
alumina. Lime-treated soil effectively increases the strength, durability and workability of the soil. Such
treatment also improves soil compressibility. A fluctuation behavior was observed on the influence of lime
on soil permeability. However, the factors affecting the permeability of the soil-lime mixture should be
extensively studied. Nonetheless, lime treatment has a number of inherent disadvantages, such as
carbonation, sulfate attack and environment impact. Magnesium oxide/hydroxide are thus proposed as a
suitable alternative stabilizer to overcome at least some of the disadvantages of using lime in soil
stabilization.

2.5.7 Guidelines for the Stabilization of Subgrades Soil in California

California is geologically active and a wide variety of soil types occur across the state. A thorough
understanding of these subgrade soils in any pavement project area is essential to appropriately engineer
the construction, rehabilitation, or widening of a highway facility. Subgrade is defined in the California
Department of Transportation (Caltrans) Standard Specifications as “Roadbed portion on which pavement,
surfacing, base, subbase, or a layer of any other material is placed.” It is the soil or rock material underlying
the pavement structure, and unlike base and wearing course (surfacing) materials whose characteristics are
relatively uniform, there is often substantial variability of engineering properties of subgrade soils over the
length of a project. Since pavements are engineered to distribute stresses imposed by traffic to the subgrade,
the subgrade conditions have a significant influence on the choice and thickness of pavement structure and
the way it is designed. Depending on the existing soils and project design, the properties of the subgrade
may need to be improved, either mechanically, chemically, or both, to provide a platform for the construction
of subsequent layers and to provide adequate support for the pavement over its design life. This will limit
shear that may lead to permanent deformation; limit deflection that may lead to fatigue cracking; and limit
expansion and contraction that leads to roughness. Stabilization of subgrade materials (defined in Section
1.4) has a number of benefits. Firstly, it eliminates the need to excavate substandard materials, transport
them to a suitable site where they can be disposed of, and then excavate and import more suitable materials.
Secondly, it improves the properties of existing materials, thereby providing a good platform for the overlying
pavement layers. This is from the study paper of (Jones, 2012).

2.5.8 Stabilization of Marginal Soils using Municipal Solid Waste (MSW) Ash

According to the study by Muhunthan et al. (2004), they investigated the geotechnical properties of MSW
ash mixes. The mixes in this study included blends of bottom ash and fly ash produced at a mass burn facility
in Spokane, Washington. The blends that were tested were composed of 0, 20, 40, 60, 80, and 100% bottom
ash to fly ash and vice versa totalling 6 different blends. The samples were tested for compaction behavior,
shear strength by the direct shear test, and permeability. From the compaction tests made, it was seen that
the incinerator ash mixes exhibit behavior similar to that of clays. It should also be noted that incinerator ash
mixes achieved much lower unit weights than typical values for sand and clay. While comparing the bottom
ash to fly ash, it was seen that the 100% bottom ash sample exhibited significantly lower optimum moisture
content than the 100% fly ash sample. It showed that the fly ash contained much smaller particles than
bottom ash thereby increasing the amount of surface area of particles to be covered with moisture. Direct
shear tests were conducted on each blend at optimum moisture content and on the as-received samples of
incinerator ash. The results showed that the friction angle for the blends increased with percentage of bottom
ash with the highest value being 50.70 for the 100% bottom ash blend. The opposite was true for calculated
cohesion values. The cohesion of the blends decreased with increasing percentage of fly ash with the highest
value being 34.1 kPa for the 100% fly ash blend. The overall results from the direct shear testing showed
that incinerator ash blends will tend to have better strength characteristics than typical fill materials and since
ash is relatively lighter than typical fill material, lower normal stresses. This in turn will allow for the generation
of lower normal stresses on foundation soils. Similar to the direct shear tests which were conducted,
permeability was investigated on all blends at optimum moisture content as well as at as-received moisture
content.

2.5.9 Stabilization of Marginal Soils using Scrap Roof Shingles

In the study made by Hooper and Marr (2004), the effects of adding asphalt shingle tabs to different soils
including crushed stone gravel, a silty sand, a clean sand, and clay was investigated. When mixing the
shingle material with crushed stone gravel, 5 different mix percentages were tested. Varying amounts of
shingle tabs of 25.4 mm minus (0, 33, 50, 67, and 100% by volume) were added to the gravel. For the clean
sand, silty sand, and clay a fixed amount of 33% by volume shingle tabs were blended in. A number of
different tests were conducted on these samples, including sieve analysis, Atterberg limits, compaction, and
California bearing ratio (CBR). The test results from this study that was made varied with shingle to soil mix
percentages. Adding the shingle tabs to crushed stone gravel, silty sand, and clean sand resulted in a
decreasing affect on the strength according to the CBR test. The only strength increase was experienced
when the shingles were added to clay. This can be explained by the ability of the clay to hold the shingle
tabs in place by cohesion. This would allow for the shingles to remain in place during loading and refrain
from slipping. The study by Hooper and Marr does gave an idea on how addition of scrap shingle tabs can
affect the strength of different types of soils however; the shingles used in this study were obtained from a
pre-consumer source. They were basically the scraps leftover from shingle production. This source of waste
shingles will typically end up in a landfill and is in need of some sort of recycling application but only makes
up 10% of the total shingle waste produced nationally. The majority of shingle waste produced comes from
tear-off post consumer shingles.

2.5.10 Stabilization of Marginal Soils using Paper Mill Sludge

The study which was made by Moo-Young and Zimmie (1996), was conducted in order to determine the
geotechnical properties of paper mill sludges specifically for use in landfill covers. They collected and studied
7 different paper mill sludges from different sources including wastewater treatment plants, paper mills, and
a sludge monofill. The sludges were tested for geotechnical properties such as Atterberg limits, compaction
behavior, shear strength and permeability. All of the sludges studied exhibited high water content, high
compressibility, and low solid content. The fact that the sludge can be compacted to low permeability makes
this material ideal for use as hydraulic barrier for landfills. Problems occurred during testing since the sludge
has a tendency to form coarse flocs upon drying, which are difficult to pulverize. All the sludge samples
collected exhibited high Atterberg limits. There was a wide range of optimum moisture contents from 50 to
100%. Shear strength testing was completed using consolidated undrained triaxial compression tests with
pore pressure measurements. Friction angles ranged from 250 to 400 while the cohesion was between 2.8
and 9 kPa. Results from this study indicate that paper mill sludge would make a suitable landfill cover
material.

2.5.11 Stabilization of Marginal Soils using Scrap Tires

According to a report made by Edinciler et al (2004), the researchers looked at the effects on the shear
strength of sand when tire buffings are added. Tire buffings are the by-product of the tire retread process.
The tire buffings in this study were between 1 and 4 mm in diameter and 2 to 40 mm in length. The small
diameter and fiber shape of the buffings make them ideal form mixing with soil compared to tire shreds or
chips. Large scale direct shear tests were conducted on the buffings and on a sand-tire buffing blend. The
results showed that at low a vertical stress of 20 kPa, the addition of tire buffings stiffened the sand at low
deformations while with the higher vertical stresses of 40 kPa, the addition of tire buffings lowers the ultimate
strength of sand; however, the displacement at failure shifts from 12 mm for sand only to 35 mm when buffings
are added. From these results, it can be deduced that adding tire buffings to an embankment material can
allow for the embankment to undergo larger strains without failure.

2.5.12 Stabilization of Expansive Soils using Waste Marble Dust

According to the studies conducted by Terzaghi, Peck and Mesri (1996), and Fredlund and Rahardjo (1993),
Expansive soils, which usually contain the clay mineral montmorillonite, include sedimentary and residual
soils, claystones, and shales. In arid and semiarid climates, they exist in a moisture-deficient, unsaturated
condition. The expansive nature of soil is most obvious near ground surface where the profile is subject to
seasonal, environmental changes.

According to the study of Wayne et al. (1984), there are many correlations that are useful in identifying
potentially expansive soils. It may also be possible to identify them visually. Visual indications include: 1)
Wide and deep shrinkage cracks occurring during dry periods 2) Soil is rock-hard when dry, but very sticky
and soft when wet 3) Damages on the surrounding structures due to expansion of soil.

2.5.13 Stabilization of Very Weak Subgrade Soil With Cementitious Stabilizers

From the study made by Prusinski and Bhattacharja (1999), the subgrade in flexible pavement is more
vulnerable when it comes to failure under the vehicular traffic loading due to the non- uniform distribution of
the load from overlying layers and the presence of high moisture contents. The layer gets less emphasis
compared to other layers in pavement, despite the fact that most of the pavement failure is being caused due
to the bearing capacity failure of the subgrade layer. Some of the subgrade soils, especially the clayey soils,
have great strength at low moisture content; however they become very weak and less workable with the
increase in water content beyond the optimum value. Such soil should be either replaced with superior quality
fill material or treated with suitable treatment process
 CHAPTER 3: CONSTRAINTS, TRADEOFFS, AND STANDARDS

3.1 Design Constraints

Constraint is defined as a constraining condition, agency, or force that limits the systems’
performance in a given context/ environment. Constraint describes the relationships between objects and
processes. Constraints have to be managed. Practically, in all cases the constraints’ limiting impact can be
reduced or eliminated.
In this project, the design constraints were divided into two types, namely, quantitative and
qualitative. Quantitative constraints are those constraints that can be measured using engineering methods
(estimation). The qualitative constraints are those which cannot be measured but are ranked through the
designer’s perception and experience. The following are the constraints that are considered in the design of
the structure.

3.1.1 Quantitative Constraints:

1. Economic Constraints (Project Cost) – The designer will be evaluating three structural
systems; Prefabricated Vertical Drains, Stone Column, Pile Embankments, and Geogrid Soil
Reinforcement on which of these four is the most economical. Thus, the effect of these three to
the strength of the structure is also taken into considerations. It is being finalized and evaluated,
and the best option will be the one that the designer will consider.
2. Constructability Constraints (Project Duration) - The designer will also determine and
evaluate the number of man-hours required for the construction of three alternative structural
system. The alternatives will be estimated by the designer in terms of material and labor costs.
The construction duration is significant since there was allotted time that the structure must be
done. The design that would only accumulate a short range of time will be the most effective to
be used.
3. Safety (Seismic Resistance) -The constraint will be measured based on the lateral
displacement of the three structural systems when subjected to lateral forces. Buildings,
specifically its structure should be capable to withstand lateral loads such as seismic and wind
 loads. Having considered the constructability and cost of structure of the three alternatives, it is
also reasonable to look at the safety of the structure.

3.1.2. Qualitative Constraints:

1. Aesthetics. The beauty of the structure lies upon its final output. This constraint depends on
the taste of a person therefore it is considered as a qualitative constraint. It depends on a person’s
perception which design is more presentable.

2. Sustainability. In civil engineering, sustainability refers to the conditions under which a

building is still considered useful. Should these limit states be exceeded, as structure that may still
be structurally sound would nevertheless be considered unfit.

In considering design constraints, trade-offs were provided by the designer that have a significant
effect on the structural design of the commercial building. As a trade-off, the designer will have to
evaluate whether to use shear walls or frames only in terms of economic, constructability and safety
constraints.

3.2 Tradeoffs

Figure 3.1 Prefabricated Vertical Drains (PVD)

http://www.vibromenard.co.uk/techniques/vertical-drains/
 Figure 3.2 Stone Column (Vibro Replacement)

http://en.ptc.fayat.com/GROUND-IMPROVEMENT/Stone-Columns-Method

Figure 3.3 Pile Embankment

http://www.tencate.com/emea/geosynthetics/markets/civil-works/solutions/reinforced-
embankments/default.aspx
 Figure 3.4 Geogrid Soil Reinforcement

https://www.agriculturesolutions.com/products/agricultural-fabrics/geotextiles-soil-
stabilization/geogrid-soil-reinforcement/dupont-groundgrid-ground-stabilization-small-grid-
4-x-25-detail

Pre-fabricated vertical drains

Prefabricated Vertical Drains (PVDs) or ‘Wick Drains' are composed of a plastic core encased by a
geotextile for the purpose of expediting consolidation of slow draining soils. They are typically coupled with
surcharging to expedite preconstruction soil consolidation. Surcharging means to pre-load soft soils by
applying a temporary load to the ground that exerts stress of usually equivalent or greater magnitude than
the anticipated design stresses. The surcharge will increase pore water pressures initially, but with time the
water will drain away and the soil voids will compress. These prefabricated wick drains are used to shorten
pore water travel distance, reducing the preloading time. The intent is to accelerate primary settlement. Pore
water will flow laterally to the nearest drain, as opposed to vertical flow to an underlying or overlying drainage
layer. The drain flow is a result from the pressures generated in the pore water. Figure 2 below demonstrate
vertical water flow without the use of prefabricated wick drains, and horizontal water flow with the use of wick
drains.

Benefits of PVDs

 Decrease overall time required for completion of primary consolidation due to preloading
 Decrease the amount of surcharge required to achieve the desired amount of precompression in
the given time
 Increase the rate of strength gain due to consolidation of soft soils when stability is of concern

Stone column (Vibro replacement)

This process densifies granular soils and reinforces all soils. Vibro replacement stone columns are
constructed with either the wet top-feed process, or the dry bottom-feed process.

In the wet top-feed process, the vibrator penetrates to the design depth using the vibrator’s weight and
vibrations, as well as water jets located in the tip. The stone (crushed stone or recycled concrete) is then
added at the ground surface to the annular space around the vibrator created by the jetting water. The stone
falls through the space to the vibrator tip, and fills the void created as the vibrator is lifted several feet. The
vibrator is lowered, densifying and displacing the underlying stone. The vibro replacement process is
repeated in lifts until a dense stone column is constructed to the ground surface.

The dry bottom-feed process is similar, except that no water jets are used and the stone is fed to the
vibrator tip through an attached feed pipe. Pre-drilling of dense strata at the column location may be required
for the vibrator to penetrate to the design depth. Both methods of construction create a high modulus stone
column that reinforces the treatment zone and densifies surrounding granular soils.

Common Uses:

 Increase bearing capacity

 Decrease settlement
 Mitigate liquefaction
 http://www.haywardbaker.com/solutions/techniques/vibro-replacement

Piled Embankment

In the areas having low factor of safety against bearing capacity and slope stability; stage construction
of the embankment may have to be resorted to, in which waiting period have to be introduced between stages
to allow for consolidation and strength gain. When the required construction period extends beyond the
limited time frame available, stability berms need to be introduced to reduce the number of construction
stages. Moreover, these berms may extend beyond the right of way and require more land to be acquired. In
cases of problems of limited time and space constraints it may be necessary to adopt structural solution.

Geogrid Soil Reinforcement

If the weight of the wall units alone can't resist the force of an unstable soil wedge or any load on top of it,
then geogrid soil reinforcement is needed. Horizontal layers of geogrid provide tensile strength to hold the
reinforced soil mass together. The geogrid-reinforced soil mass becomes part of the retaining wall system,
giving the wall system more size and weight to resist pressures from behind it.
Using the model on trade-off strategies in engineering design (Otto & Antonson, 1991), the
importance of each criterion (on scale of 0 to 5, 5 with the highest importance) was assigned and each design
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. The designer computed the ability to satisfy the criterion using this
procedure.

Computation of ranking for ability to satisfy criterion of materials:

𝐻𝑖𝑔ℎ𝑒𝑟 𝑣𝑎𝑙𝑢𝑒 − 𝐿𝑜𝑤𝑒𝑟 𝑣𝑎𝑙𝑢𝑒

% 𝑑𝑖𝑓𝑓𝑒𝑟𝑒𝑛𝑐𝑒 = 𝑥10
𝐻𝑖𝑔ℎ𝑒𝑟 𝑣𝑎𝑙𝑢𝑒
Equation 3.1

𝑆𝑢𝑏𝑜𝑟𝑑𝑖𝑛𝑎𝑡𝑒 𝑟𝑎𝑛𝑘 = 𝐺𝑜𝑣𝑒𝑟𝑛𝑖𝑛𝑔 𝑟𝑎𝑛𝑘 − (%𝑑𝑖𝑓𝑓𝑒𝑟𝑒𝑛𝑐𝑒)

Equation 3.2
 The governing rank is the subjective choice of the designer. In assigning the value for the criterion’s
importance and the ability to satisfy the criterion, the designer would subjectively choose any desired value.
This subjective value depends on the initial estimate, say for economic criterion, which the designer can
initially select. The subordinate rank in Equation 3.2 is a variable that corresponds to its percentage distance
from the governing rank along the ranking scale.

3.2.1. Raw Designer’s Ranking

Considering the design constraints, the designer came up with the raw rankings on the SMRF, Dual
System, and Bearing Wall System. The discussion on how the designer came up with the raw rankings values
are shown and computed below.

Criterion’s
Importance Ability to satisfy the criterion
(on a scale of 0 (on a scale from -5 to 5)
Decision Criteria
to 5)
Stone Pile Geogrid Soil
PVD
Column Embankment Reinforcement
1. Economic 5 5
5 4 3
(Cost)
2. Constructability 3
4 3 5
(Duration) 4
3. Safety 5
5 3 5
(Seismic Resistance) 1
Over-all Rank 47 70 41 62
Table 0-1. Raw Designer's Ranking

*Reference: Otto, K. N. and Antonsson, E. K., (1991). Trade-off strategies in engineering design. Research
in Engineering Design,
volume 3, number 2, pages 87-104.
Retrieved from http://www.design.caltech.edu/Research/Publications/90e.pdf on March 11, 2013
3.2.2. Tradeoff’s Assessment

The value on the criterion’s importance will then depend on the client’s and designer’ decision since
it is subjective. In this case, economic constraint was given an importance of five (5) since the client wanted
the cost to be observed. The constructability constraint is given an importance of four (4) since it is somehow
a part of the economic constraint, the longer the duration, the costly the project will be. However, since the
location is less than 10 kilometers away from the nearest seismic zone, environmental/ safety constraints is
also given an importance of 5.

3.2.3. Initial Cost Estimate

The designer provided cost estimates for both structural system alternatives. Through this estimates,
the designer can be able to come up with which of the following type of structural system will win for economic,
constructability, and environmental constraint. The initial cost estimates were elaborated in Appendix B of
this paper. The designer consider the cost provided in the Philippine Market.

Constraints PVD Stone Column Pile Geogrid

Embankment

1. Economic 1,100,000.00 P1,000,000.00 P1,290,000.00 P900,00.00

2. Constructability 9 months 10 months 12 months 7.5 months

3. Safety 39.672mm 32.215mm 35.425mm 45.654mm

Table 3-2. Summary of Initial Design Output

Computation for Economic Constraint

1,290,000 − 900,000
% 𝑑𝑖𝑓𝑓𝑒𝑟𝑒𝑛𝑐𝑒 = 𝑥10
1,290,000
=3.02 = 3
Subordinate rank = Governing Rank - %difference = 5-3 = 2

Figure 0-1. Cost Difference

Computation of ranking for Constructability Constraint

12 − 7.5
% 𝑑𝑖𝑓𝑓𝑒𝑟𝑒𝑛𝑐𝑒 = 𝑥10
12
=3.75 = 4
Subordinate Rank: 5-4 =1

Figure 0-2. Constructability Difference

Computation of ranking for Environmental Constraint (Safety)

45.614 − 32.215
% 𝑑𝑖𝑓𝑓𝑒𝑟𝑒𝑛𝑐𝑒 = 𝑥10
45.614
= 2.27 = 3
Subordinate Rank: 5-3 = 2

Figure 0-3. Environmental Difference

3.3 Design Standards

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 2001.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. Code used to design the structure is attached in
Appendix A.

Material Properties. The following material strengths were used in the design of the project:

1. Concrete – the minimum compressive strength of concrete, fc’ = 20.7 MPa for:
a. Beams, slabs and girders
b. Columns and footings

2. Reinforcing steel bars shall be deformed and shall conform with PNS 49/ASTM 615:
a. Grade 40, fy = 345 MPa
For bars 20mm in diameter and smaller

Loadings. The forces acting on the structure are categorized into three, namely dead load, live
load, and environmental loads (wind and earthquake). The required lateral loads due to wind and
earthquake forces shall be separately calculated. These loadings are excerpted from the National
Structural Code of the Philippines.
Seismic Loads. Seismic forces were determined based on the equivalent static force procedure
and computed following the provisions of NSCP 2001, section 208.

Deformation Limits. Structures or structural members shall be checked such that the maximum
deformation does not exceed the following:

a. Beams and Girders. Beams and girders supporting floors and roof shall be proportioned with
due regard to the deflection produced by the design loads. Considering then the total deflection,
which is due to the additional live loads, occurring after attachment of non-structural elements
shall not exceed L/360.
`