PROJECT REPORT

on

DESIGN OF CONTAINER BERTH AT

VISAKHAPATNAM PORT
Submitted in partial fulfillment for the award of the
degree

of
BACHELOR OF TECHNOLOGY
in
CIVIL ENGINEERING

by

ADITI PATNAIK 1011010008

M.ASIF RAHUMAN 1011010030
G.K.CHIDAMBARAM 1011010043
N.DINESH KUMAR 1011010057

Under the guidance of

Mrs. S.SIVAKAMASUNDARI
Assistant Professor (O.G)

DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL ENGINEERING

FACULTY OF ENGINEERING AND TECHNOLOGY
SRM UNIVERSITY
(Under section 3 of UGC Act 1956)
SRM Nagar, Kattankulathur- 603203
Kancheepuram District

APRIL 2014

i
 PROJECT REPORT
on

DESIGN OF CONTAINER BERTH AT

VISAKHAPATNAM PORT
Submitted in partial fulfillment for the award of the
degree

of
BACHELOR OF TECHNOLOGY
in
CIVIL ENGINEERING

by

ADITI PATNAIK 1011010008

M.ASIF RAHUMAN 1011010030
G.K.CHIDAMBARAM 1011010043
N.DINESH KUMAR 1011010057

Under the guidance of

Mrs. S.SIVAKAMASUNDARI
Assistant Professor (O.G)

DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL ENGINEERING

FACULTY OF ENGINEERING AND TECHNOLOGY
SRM UNIVERSITY
(Under section 3 of UGC Act 1956)
SRM Nagar, Kattankulathur- 603203
Kancheepuram District

APRIL 2014

ii
 BONAFIDE CERTIFICATE

Certified that this project report titled “DESIGN OF

CONTAINER BERTH AT VISAKHAPATNAM PORT” is the

bonafide work of ADITI PATNAIK (1011010008), M.ASIF

RAHUMAN (1011010030), G.K.CHIDAMBARAM (1011010043),

N.DINESHKUMAR (1011010057) who carried out the research under

my supervision. Certified further, that to the best of my knowledge the

work reported herein does not form part of any other project report or

dissertation on the basis of which a degree or award was conferred on an

earlier occasion or any other candidate.

Signature of the Guide Signature of the HOD

Mrs. S.SIVAKAMASUNDARI Dr. R. ANNADURAI

Assistant Professor (O.G) Professor & Head

Department of Civil Engineering Department of Civil Engineering
SRM University SRM University
Kattankulathur- 603203 Kattankulathur- 603203

EXAMINER - I EXAMINER II

DATE:

iii
 ABSTRACT

In the early 1920s the Indian Government decided to construct

a harbour at Visakhapatnam in the East Coast of India in order to provide
a direct outlet for mineral and other products of the Central Province.
Today it is one of the largest port in India, developing rapidly from a
small mineral trading port into a major harbour handling both cargo as
well as container traffic. The port of Visakhapatnam recently constructed
22 berths to extend the bulk handling facilities as well as regulate the
traffic congestion. The feasibility study for the further extension of the
existing container terminal has been made. It examined the need,
justification and viability of providing further extension to the present
container terminal including additions to the related facilities at Outer
Harbour of the Port of Visakhapatnam to cope up with the anticipated
increase in demand of container traffic. The peace of land 350 m in
length available beyond the already existing container berth is utilized
for the extension. Berth is divided into several platforms in order to ease
the execution of work. To reduce sustainability constrain such as
corrosion reaction a cover of 75 mm is provided. Thinner sections are
not possible in working stress method design, so limit state method is
adopted for the design. Due to Environmental constraints the different
wave level and their effects will affect the construction time and
efficiency. When the tidal wave is at peak, pre-cast work is preferred,
whereas when the waves are low in-site work is carried out.

iv
 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

We would like to place on record, our grateful thanks to Dr.T.P.GANESAN,

Pro Vice Chancellor (P&D), for providing all facilities and help in carrying out this
project. We thank Dr. C. MUTHAMIZHCHELVAN, Director (E&T) for the
stimulus provided.
We are extremely grateful to Dr. R. ANNADURAI, Professor and Head,
Department of Civil Engineering for the encouragement and support provided during
the project work. .
We express our sincere thanks to the coordinator Dr. K. GUNASEKARAN,
Professor, for his valuable suggestions for improvement during project reviews.
We hereby acknowledge with deep sense of gratitude the valuable guidance,
encouragement and suggestions given by our guide Mrs. S.SIVAKAMA SUNDARI
Assistant Professor (O.G) ,who has been a constant source of inspiration throughout
this project.
Also, we would like to take this opportunity to thank all the faculty members
and non-teaching staff members in the Department of Civil Engineering for their
direct and indirect help rendered during the course of the project work.
We also thank the staff of SRM DTP section for their efforts in composing
the project report. We record our sincere thanks to our parents for the support and
motivation.
Last, but not the least, we thank all our friends, who freely helped us in many
ways towards the successful completion of this project work.

ADITI PATNAIK
M.ASIF RAHUMAN
G.K. CHIDAMBARAM
N.DINESH KUMAR

v
 TABLE OF CONTENTS

CHAPTER TITLE PAGE

ABSTRACT iii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT iv
LIST OF TABLES x
LIST OF FIGURES xi
ABBREVATIONS xii

1. OVERVIEW
1.1 OBJECTIVE 1
1.2 NECESSITY 1
1.3 SCOPE 2
1.4 METHODOLOGY 2
1.5 MAJOR DESIGN EXPERINENCE 3
1.6 REALISTIC DESIGN CONSTRAINTS 3
1.7 REFERENCE TO CODE AND STANDARDS 4
1.8 APPLICATION OF EARLIER COURSEWORK 5
1.9 MULTIDISCIPLINARY COMPONENT 5
1.10 SOFTWARE USED 6
1.11 EXPECTED OUTCOME 6

2. INTRODUCTION
2.1 GENERAL 7
2.2 LITERATURE REVIEW 8
2.3 SUMMARY OF LITERATURE REVIEW 9

3. OBJECTIVE AND SCOPE

3.1 OBJECTIVE 10
3.2 SCOPE 10
3.3 MATERIALS AND METHODOLOGY 10

vi
 3.4 SITE INFORMATION
3.4.1 Selection of Site 11
3.4.2 Geotechnical Data 11
3.4.3 Tidal Information 12
3.4.4 Wind Data 12
3.4.5 Temperature 12
3.4.6 Cyclones 12
3.4.7 Currents 13
3.4.8 Waves 13
3.4.9 Humidity 13
3.4.10 Rainfall 14
3.4.11 Visibility 14
3.4.12 Salinity 14

4. RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS

4.1 PLANNING 15
4.1.1 Single platform 15
4.1.2 Cross-section 17
4.1.3 Calculation of loads 18
4.1.4 Dead Loads (DL) 20
4.1.5 Live Loads 23
4.1.6 Berthing Load (BL) 24
4.1.7 Mooring Force 25
4.1.8 Seismic force 25
4.1.9 Earth Pressure Load 29
4.1.10 Load Combinations 29
4.2 ANALYSIS 30
4.3 DESIGN 32
4.3.1 Design of Pile Foundation 32
4.3.2 Design of Pile Cap 34
4.3.3 Design of Piles 34
4.3.4 Design of beams 36

vii
 4.3.5 Design of Main Beam 37
4.3.6 Design of Secondary Beam 41
4.3.7 Design of Crane beam 44
4.3.8 Design of Deck slab 48
4.3.9 Fenders 53
4.3.10 Bollards 57
4.3.11 Design of Office Building 59
4.3.11.1 Operational and Maintainance Factors 59
4.3.11.2 Environmental Factors 59
4.3.11.3 Planning and Layout 60
4.3.11.4 STAAD.Pro V8i Model 60
4.3.11.5 Design of Slab 63
4.3.11.6 Design of Beam 68
4.3.11.7 Design of Column 69

5. CONCLUSION
5.1 CONCLUSION 71
5.2 FUTURE SCOPE 71

REFERENCES 72

viii
 LIST OF TABLES

TABLE NO TITLE PAGENO

1.1 Codes and Standards 4

1.2 Applied Coursework 5
3.1 Geotechnical Data 11
3.2 Tidal Information 12
4.1 Load Combination 30
4.2 Value of ks 33
4.3 1300 mm diameter piles 35
4.4 1200 mm diameter piles 35
4.5 1300 mm diameter piles 35
4.6 1200 mm diameter piles 35
4.7 Bending Moments 51
4.8 Bending Moment and Shear Stress 52
due to loads
4.9 Fender Materials 57
4.10 Design Parameter (Beam) 69
4.11 Design Parameter (Column) 70

ix
 LIST OF FIGURES

FIGURE NO TITLE PAGE

2.1 Visakhapatnam Port View 8

2.2 Chemical composition of steel 8
4.1 Berth Layout 16
4.2 Single platform of 50m length 17
4.3 Typical Cross section 17
4.4 STAAD model of single platform 18
4.5 Top view of berth structure 19
4.6 STAAD.Pro V8i model 31
4.7 Maximum compression obtained from 31
STAAD.Pro V8i
4.8 Load acting on main beam 39
4.9 Fenders 56
4.10 Bollards 58
4.11 STAAD.Pro V8i 3D rendered view
for Office Building 61
4.12 Ground Floor Plan for Office Building 62
4.13 First Floor Plan for Office Building 63
4.14 Reinforcement of Beam 69
4.15 Reinforcement of Column 70

x
 ABBREVIATIONS

Ast = Area of Steel Reinforcement

Ast reqd = Area of steel required
Ap = Bearing area of the pile at tip
αx = Bending moment coefficient for short span
αy = Bending moment coefficient for long span
b = Width
Cm =Mass coefficient
Ce = Eccentricity coefficient
Cs = Softness coefficient
deff = Effective Depth
fck = Characteristic compressive strength of concrete
fy = Yield stress of steel
Lx = Length in x direction
Ly = Length in y direction
Mx = Moment in short span direction
My = Moment in long span direction
Mz = Moment in z-axis
Mx = Moment in x-axis
Mu = Ultimate moment
Mu,lim = Ultimate limiting moment of resistance
MR = Resultant Moment
Po = Ultimate bearing capacity of the rock.
Pu = Axial Load
Pt = the percentage of reinforcement
SM = Slenderness Moment
= Nominal Shear Stress
TM = Total Moment
Vu = Design shear force
V = Velocity of Vehicle in m/s

xi
WD = Displacement Tonnage (DT) of the vessel
Wu = Ultimate load

xii
xiii
xiv
 CHAPTER 1

OVERVIEW

1.1 OBJECTIVE

 To provide an extension to the existing container berth at the

Visakhapatnam Container Terminal of Visakhapatnam Port, Andhra
Pradesh.
 To optimize and expand the cargo-handling capacity at the terminal.
 To provide a portion of the facilities, needed to accommodate the long-
term growth in the volume of the container cargo through the Port

1.2 NECESSITY

 VPT handled about 56 MTEU of cargo in the year 2005-06. It is

expected that this traffic is likely to grow to about 89 MTEU by 2012-13.
Keeping this increase in cargo in mind it becomes important for the port
to make necessary provisions.
 To improve the terminal’s ability to accommodate increased numbers
and sizes of the container vessels.
 To increase the accommodation for container ship berthing and
operation.
 To handle the traffic volume in the internal terminal.

1
1.3 SCOPE

 To design the container berth of 340m × 35.75m with a draft of 14m.

 To design the following structural and operational components
 Berth: It will be designed with a pile foundation and a
reinforced cement concrete (RCC) deck slab with
beams (main beam, secondary beam and crane beam),
fenders and bollards.
 Stacking Area: Concreting for the operational area.
 Operational Office: Design for Single storey

1.4 METHODOLOGY
The methodology followed is given below
 Literature review: Relevant codes and books are referred and required
data are collected.
 Site Information:
 Geotechnical Data
 Tidal Information
 Wind and wave forces
 Current forces and Cyclones
 Temperature and Humidity
 Salinity and Visibility
 Planning and Layout: Layout of the Container terminal using AutoCAD
2010.
 Calculation of loads: With reference to IS and BS, design loads are
calculated.
 Analysis and Design:
 Analysis and Design of Pile Foundation.
 Analysis and Design of Slabs
 Analysis and Design of Main Beam.
 Analysis and Design of Secondary Beam.
 Analysis and Design of Crane Beam.

2
  Analysis and Design of Office Building.
 Fenders: Design, Type, Position.
 Bollards: Design, Type, Position.

1.5 MAJOR DESIGN EXPERIENCE

The project is a “Structural Design Project”. Design experiences in the
following areas have been gained during the course of the project.
1. Design of Main Beam.
2. Design of Secondary Beam.
3. Design of Crane Beam.
4. Design of Deck Slab.
5. Design of Pile Foundation.
6. Design of Fender.
7. Design of Bollard.

1.6 REALISTIC DESIGN CONSTRAINTS

The realistic design constraints that are likely to be experienced in this
off-shore construction are as follows:
 Sustainability: Due to the high salt (chloride) content in the sea water, the
sub structure will get corroded. To reduce such reactions a cover of 75 mm is
provided.
 Economic constraints: Thinner sections are not possible in working stress
method design, so limit state method is adopted for the design.
 Environmental constraints: The different wave level and their effects will
affect the construction time and efficiency. When the tidal wave is at the
peak, pre-cast work is preferred, whereas when the waves are low in-site
work is carried out

3
1.7 REFERENCE TO CODES AND STANDARDS
In this project, apart from the Indian Standards, the British Standards are
also used are referred in the Table 1.1 below.
Table 1.1 Codes and standards
CODES CONTEXT
IS:4651:1974 Code of practice for planning and design of ports and
(Part I) harbours – part I – site investigation

IS:4651:1989 Code of practice for planning and design of ports and

(Part II) harbours – part II – earth pressure

IS:4651:1974 Code of practice for planning and design of ports and

(Part III) harbours – part III – loading
IS:4651:1989 Code of practice for planning and design of ports and
(Part IV) harbours – part IV – general design considerations
IS:4651:1980 Code of practice for planning and design of ports and
(Part V) harbours – part V – layout and functional requirements
IS:2911:1980 Code of practice for design and construction of pile
(Part II) foundation
IS:2911:2010 Code of practice for design and construction of pile
(Part I/Sec 1) foundation – part I – concrete piles– section 1: driven cast
in-situ concrete piles
IS:2911:2010 Design and construction of pile foundations code of
(Part I/Sec 3) practice – part 1: concrete piles – section 3: driven precast
concrete piles
IS 456 : 2000 Code of practice for general structural use of plain and
reinforced concrete.
SP 16 – 1980 Design aids for reinforced concrete to is 456-1978

IS 1893 : 2002 Criteria for earthquake resistant design of structures.

4
 Table 1.1 Codes and standards
IRC 6 : 2000 – Standard specifications and code of practice for road
Section II bridges – loads and stresses
IRC 21 : 2000 Standard specifications and code of practice for road
Section III bridges- concrete (plain and reinforced)

1.8 APPLICATION OF EARLIER COURSE WORK

Table 1.2 Applied coursework

COURSE CODE AND NAME CONTEXT
CE 0104 – Computer aided building Computer aided building drawing
drawing
CE 0201 - Mechanics of Solids Evaluation of bending moment and shear
forces
CE 0202 - Strength of Materials Evaluation of deflection
CE 0301-Structural Analysis - I Analysis of determinate structures

CE 0302 - Structural Analysis – II Analysis of indeterminate structures

CE 0303 - Structural Design – II Design of masonry and reinforced
concrete structures
CE 0304 – Structural Design – III Design of RCC structures
CE 0311-Soil mechanics laboratory Conducting soil tests
The above Table1.2 shows the application of earlier course.

1.9 MULTIDISCIPLINARY COMPONENT

This project involves students in multidisciplinary team work, like

interacting with the public and Government officials (Port Trust, geotechnical

details), while procuring the data and knowledge about the rules and regulations of

the available terminal area. It also involves interaction with software professionals to

learn about the function and operation of the softwares that are going to used for the

5
analysis and design of the components of the structure. The wave, tide and current

actions as well as the berthing and mooring forces exerted by the vessel had been

studied here.

1.10 SOFTWARE USED

The various software used in the project are follows below

 STAAD.Pro V8i
 AutoCAD 2010
 Microsoft Excel 2007

1.11 EXPECTED OUTCOME

 A construction of a fully-functional extension to the existing container

berth in the Outer Harbour of Visakhapatnam Port.
 It will not only reduce the traffic congestion, but will also welcome more
vessels.
 This extension will also improve the cargo-handling capacity of the
already existing berth.

6
 CHAPTER 2

INTRODUCTION

2.1GENERAL
With the Indian coastline extending over 6000kms, the ports play an
important role in overall growth of economy in general and industries situated near it
in particular. Further, with 95% of the country’s transportation of goods is by sea, the
development of ports would be very critical for the nation’s progress. Construction
and maintenance of marine structures is an entirely different sector of engineering
practice. It requires thorough and intimate knowledge of the marine environment,
science of materials of construction and engineering design of construction. So this
project has been taken by considering the sustainability, economic and
environmental constraints of the offshore structures.

The container traffic through the Visakhapatnam Port has registered a

steady increase during the past few years. There are indications that the trend is
likely to assume proportions that the Port may have to plan for equipping itself
adequately to meet the demand of the future container traffic. As on date the Port has
one full-fledged modern container terminal with facilities to handle about 50-70
MTEU per annum. It is expected to rise to 89 MTEU by 2012-2013. The current
proposals are for further extension of the Visakhapatnam Container Terminal in the
Outer Harbour of the Port of Visakhapatnam towards north-east with extension of the
Container Berth by another 350m. The further extension of container berth is
proposed adequate to cater the vessels drawing 14m draft without resorting to any
large scale capital dredging.

7
2.2 LITERATURE REVIEW
The various books, journals and sites referred are taken into
consideration, with the details highly explicitly. The standards given in the journals
and some already completed project details are referred vividly.

Business Plan Visakhapatnam Port Trust (Rotterdam Plan Project

in collaboration with Tata Consultancy Services 2007) gives us the complete
current and expected efficiency of the port regarding traffic volume and capacity of
berthing. The picture of the amount of container traffic at the various container
terminals in Visakhapatnam Port Trust is given vividly in this Fig 2.1. The statistical
increase in the circulation and function of the various types of vessels, along with the
requirements of an extension to the existing berth in the outer harbour.

Fig. 2.1 Visakhapatnam Port View (Ref.1)

ACRPS (Arab Centre for Research and Policy Studies)-

Visakhapatnam, India – Extension of Berth WQ-7 located near the proposed site,
gives us the most recent geotechnical data that includes the ground water level,
virtual description of the various type of soil strata, number of bore holes, the

8
chemical composition of the steel-type being used in the piles and various beams
referred in Figure 2.2.

Fig.2.2.Chemical composition of steel (Ref.2)

The alignment of the proposed extension is referred from the details given by the
ACRPS
.
Extension of Container Berth at Madras Port (1993): The propose of
plan and layout were referred from this journal. Manual load calculations done in this
journal were taken as reference and used in analysis of the proposed berth in
STAAD.Pro V8i. Design of bollards and fenders are done using in context to the
standard details taken in this journal and designed using AutoCAD 2010. (Ref.3)

2.2 SUMMARY OF LITERATURE REVIEW

The amenities required for the port structure and also the important terminology
regarding the port is studied. All the relevant material required to meet the objective
of this project are studied from the literature.

9
 CHAPTER 3

OBJECTIVE AND SCOPE

3.1 OBJECTIVE
The objective of the project is to provide an extension to the existing
container berth at the Visakhapatnam Container Terminal of Visakhapatnam Port,
Andhra Pradesh. The primary reason for such a construction is to optimize and
expand the cargo-handling capacity at the terminal. This will lead in providing a
portion of the facilities, needed to accommodate the long-term growth in the volume
of the container cargo through the Port. Therefore the project has been taken to
facilitate the design of the extension of the container berth in the Outer Harbour of
the Port.

3.2 SCOPE
The scope of the project involved the design the container berth of 340m
× 35.75m with a draft of 14m. To elaborate, it includes the analysis and design of the
structural and operational components such as the pile foundation, main beam,
secondary beam, crane beam, and a single storey office building.

3.3 MATERIALS AND METHODOLOGY

The first step in any project is data collection and analysis or otherwise
called literature review. The completion of literature review was followed by
selection of site and collection of site information for the port. The detailed
explanation of the site selection process is given in the following sections. The
selection of the site is followed by collection of the geotechnical data, tidal

10
information, wind data etc. Then the planning the berth includes the plan of a single
platform of 50m length and cross section. By using software STADD.ProV8i the
berth is analyzed and then components of the berth like beam, slabs and piles are
well designed. An important environmental constraint is the effect of uplift water
pressure on the structure. Since most of the structure are constructed under water
effect of water pressure are to be considered.

3.4 SITE INFORMATION

3.4.1 Selection of Site
Visakhapatnam harbour is located at 17042' 00'' North and longitude of
83023' 00'' East and the time zone is GMT + 5:30 along the East-coast of India. It is
an artificial harbour formed by breakwater. The proposed location is situated in
Outer harbour basin on the south of the Main harbour (Inner), the port has three
harbour .Outer, Inner and the Fishing harbours. The site is located on the western
side of Outer harbour. Temporary roads for transport of personnel, materials,
equipments etc. are made to the side of work and at construction yard. The
information supplied hereafter to provide necessary information regarding weather,
wind, tides, current and the geological general and other conditions. (Ref.2)

3.4.1 Geotechnical Data

Ground Water Level: -0.23. The Data is tabulated in Table 3.1. (Ref.2)
Table 3 .1 Geotechnical Data
Ground R.L (m) Visual Description of Strata N-Value
From To
+2.00 +0.00 Reddish gravelly soil _

+0.00 - 6.00 Fine sand with slit _

-8.00 -17.00 Blackish soft clay _

-17.00 -20.50 Brownish stiff clay 34

-20.50 -24.00 Highly weathered rock >50

-24.00 -27.38 Hard rock with fractures >50

11
3.4.3 Tidal Information

As per http//:www.visakhapatinamporttrust.com which is referred for

tidal information in Table 3.2. (Ref.4)

Table 3.2 Tidal Information

Highest water level recorded + 2.38m
Mean high water level spring + 1.50m
Mean high water level neaps + 1.10m
Mean sea level + 0.80m
Mean low water level neaps + 0.50m
Mean low water level spring + 0.10m
Lowest water level recorded - 0.55m
The above levels are with respect to chart datum. The chart datum at Visakhapatnam
is 0.8m below mean sea level.

3.4.4 Wind Data

The north east monsoon period is from end November to end February
with predominantly north easterly winds with an average speed of 6kts
(11.11kmph). The pre-monsoon period is from March to May usually, the period of
the year when the winds shift towards south westerly direction with an average speed
of 7kts (12.96kmph).The south-west monsoon is from middle of May up to middle of
October with predominantly south-westerly winds and cloudy weather and the rainy
season with an average wind speed of 6kts (11.11kmph).The post monsoon is from
middle of October to end November with variable weather with an average speed of
6kts (11.11kmph). (Ref.5)

3.4.5 Temperature
The mean daily maximum and minimum temperatures are about 310c and
2305’c respectively. (Ref.4)

3.4.6 Cyclones
In the Bay of Bengal, depressions are likely to be encountered during all
seasons of the year with a local fall in the pressure. On an average 4 to 5 cyclones

12
per annum may occur. Cyclones are frequent during the month of November.
Cyclones are also likely to occur during the month of May. (Ref.4)

3.4.7 Currents
From February to June, off shore current flow towards north east. From
august to December, currents flow towards south-west. The velocity ranges from 0.5
to1.0 knot. At Visakhapatnam coast, currents are neither related to wind or to tides in
any appreciable way. The determining factor for the direction of current is the
direction of predominant wave. (Ref.4)

3.4.8 Waves
Deep water waves are in the predominant direction of waves during April
to September (south west monsoon period) is south-west whereas, during the period
from November to February (north-east monsoon period), the predominant direction
is north east. The months of March and October are transition periods with no
definite predominant direction for the wave approach. Highest wave occurred during
April to September. The deep-sea waves with highest and lowest periods frequent
from south-west quadrant. Waves of over 1.5 m. Height may be expected for 20% of
the time. Wave periods of over 7 seconds may be expected 14 % of the time. Shallow
water waves are from March to October principal wave direction is predominantly
from south-south-east. The predominant wave period is between 8 to 10 seconds.
During the remainder of the year, wave direction is principally from the east and
practically all wave directions are confined to the sector between east-north-east and
south-east. (Ref.5)

3.4.9 Humidity
The humidity is comparatively high and fairly uniform during the year.
The mean daily relative humidity over a year is about 76% at 08:00 hours and 72% at
17:00 hours. (Ref.4)

13
3.4.10 Rainfall

The wet season at Visakhapatnam persists mainly during the south-west

monsoon and slightly before and after his period. September and October are the
wettest months of the year with the average rain fall of about 170 mm and 260 mm
respectively. The average annual rainfall is around 975 mm. The average number of
rainy days per annum is 50. (Ref.4)

3.4.11 Visibility

The visibility is good throughout the year, as fog is infrequent at sea in

all seasons. The highest monthly average duration recorded fog is 1 day in some
months from December to May. (Ref.4)

3.4.12 Salinity

The sea water salinity at Visakhapatnam coat varies from a mean of

about 25 c January to 29 0c in October. The salinity varies from a mean of 24.4 % in
0

November to a mean of 34.2% in April. (Ref.4)

14
 CHAPTER 4

RESULTS AND DISSCUSIONS

4.1 PLANNING
With reference to the existing container terminal at Visakhapatnam port,
the plan of the extension to the container berth is being laid out. The berth length is
350m, with a draft of 14m and the breadth is 35.75m. The entire length is divided
into 7 platforms of 50m length each. This is shown in Figure 4.1 Berth Layout.

Deep pile foundations are used. There are 2 types (size) of pile diameter.
The outer edge piles are 1.3m in diameter and are spaced at a centre to centre
distance of 6.25m in longitudinal direction and 5.8m in typical (transverse) direction.
The centrally located piles are 1.2m in diameter is spaced at a centre to centre
distance of 6.25m in longitudinal direction and 5.8m in typical (transverse) direction.
The spacing from the edge to the first pile is 1m in typical (transverse) direction and
2m to 2.5 m in the longitudinal direction. In the longitudinal direction there are 60
piles (in each row).In the transverse direction there are 6 piles (in each column).

4.1.1 Single Platform

Each platform is taken to be of 50m. The Centre to Centre distance in
transverse direction is 5.8m and in the longitudinal direction is 6.25m. The centrally
located piles are 1.2m in diameter. The outer edge piles are 1.3m in diameter. This is
shown in the Figure 4.2 below.

15
Fig. 4.1 Berth Layout
ALL DIMENSIONS ARE IN M

16
 Fig. 4.2 Single Platform of 50m length
ALL DIMENSIONS ARE IN M

4.1.2 Cross-Section
The cross-section dimensions are as shown below in Figure 4.3.
1. Bored pile: At the edges the diameter is 1.30m and the rest are 1.20m
diameter.
2. Main beam : 4.95m × 1.00m × 0.5m
3. Pre-cast Secondary beam : 1.06m × 0.9m × 0.85m
4. Crane beam : 0.90m × 0.50m × 31.25m
5. Cast In-situ Deck slab : 0.60m × 35.75m × 350m
6. PileCap : 1.70m × 1.70m × 0.5m

Fig.4.3 Typical Cross section

ALL DIMENSIONS ARE IN M

17
4.1.3 Calculation of Loads
Each platform consists of following numbers of piles.
Pile Diameter 1300 mm = 22 Nos
Pile Diameter 1200 mm = 32 Nos
Center line of platform: = 6.25 m CD (Center Line of Main
beam)
Length of Pile: = 19.1 m
Grade of Concrete: = M40
Grade of Reinforcement: = Fe415

Fig. 4.4 STAAD Model of Single Platform

The Figure 4.4 and 4.5 shows different view of STAAD.Pro V8i of a
single platform, where the pile foundations are Analysed and Design procedures are
done manually. Loads like dead load, live load, seismic load, berthing load, mooring
load and earth pressure are calculated with respective to dimension. This load is
applied on the model to get maximum moment and shear.

18
 Fig. 4.5 Top view of Berth Structure

Load Data
Unit weight of concrete = 25 kN/m3

Unit weight of wearing coat = 24 kN/m3

Submerged Unit Weight of Concrete = 15 kN/m3

Wearing coat thickness (average) = 80 mm

Deck slab thickness = 250 mm

Secondary precast beam size = 400 x 850 mm

Spacing of beams for SB = 1020 mm

Span of Secondary beams = 6250 mm

Sacrificial flanges = 75 x 75 x 75 mm

Crane precast beam size = 900 x 500 mm

Main in-situ beam width = 600 mm

Main precast beam size = 1000 x 500 mm

Pile muff size = 1700 x 1700 x 500 mm

19
Pile diameter (A & F Grid) = 1300 mm

Pile diameter (B, C, D & E Grid) = 1200 mm

4.1.4 Dead Loads (DL)

Piles: Self weight of pile (considering being on conservative side)

Main berth = = 19.91 kN/m

Main berth = = 16.96 kN/m

Pile muff = 1.7 x 1.7 x 0.5 x 25 = 36.10 kN/m

Main beam (MB1)

Precast portion = 1 x 0.5 x 4.95 x 25 = 61.87 kN

In-situ Portion = 1 x 0.5 x 1.3 x 25 = 6.25 kN

Total = 78.13 kN

In-situ Portion (stage 1) = 1 x 0.5 x 1 x 25 = 12.50 kN/m

In-situ Portion (stage 2) = 0.6 x 1.1 x 1 x 25 = 16.50 kN/m

Cantilever slab = 1.882 x 0.4 x 1 x 25 = 18.82 kN/m

Total = 47.80 kN/m

Main beam (MB2)

Precast portion = 1 x 0.5 x 4.95 x 25 = 61.87 kN

In-situ Portion = 1 x 0.5 x1.3 x 25 = 16.25 kN

Total = 78.13 kN

In-situ Portion (stage 1) = 1 x 0.5 x 1 x 25 = 12.50 kN/m

In-situ Portion (stage 2) = 0.6 x 1.1 x 1 x 25 = 16.50 kN/m

Cantilever slab = 1.882 x 0.4 x 1 x 25 = 18.82 kN/m

20
Total = 48.80 kN/m

Main beam (MB3)

Precast portion = 1 x 0.5 x 4.95 x 25 = 61.87 kN

In-situ Portion = 1 x 0.5 x 1.3 x 25 = 16.25 kN

Total = 78.13 kN

In-situ Portion (stage 1) = 1 x 0.5 x 1 x 25 = 12.50 kN/m

In-situ Portion (stage 2) = 0.6 x 1.1 x 1 x 25 = 16.50 kN/m

Cantilever slab = 1.882 x 0.4 x 1 x 25 = 18.82 kN/m

Total = 48.80 kN/m

Main beam (MB4)

Precast portion = 1 x 0.5 x 4.95 x 25 = 61.87 kN

In-situ Portion = 1 x 0.5 x 1.3 x 25 = 16.25 kN

Total = 78.13 kN

In-situ Portion (stage 1) = 1 x 0.5 x 1 x 25 = 12.50 kN/m

In-situ Portion (stage 2) = 0.6 x 1.1 x 1 x 25 = 16.50 kN/m

Total = 29.00 kN/m

Main beam (MB5)

Precast portion = 1 x 0.5 x 4.95 x 25 = 61.87 kN

In-situ Portion = 1 x 0.5 x 1.3 x 25 = 16.25 kN

Total = 78.13 kN

In-situ Portion (stage 1) = 1 x 0.5 x 1 x 25 = 12.50 kN/m

In-situ Portion (stage 2) = 0.6 x 1.1 x 1 x 25 = 16.50 kN/m

21
Total = 29.00 kN/m

Secondary Beams (SB)

Point load due to Secondary Beams
Deck Slab = 5.65 x 1.02 x 0.25 x25 = 36.0 kN
Secondary beam = 5.65 x 0.4 x 0.85 x 25 = 48.0 kN
Sacrificial flanges = 5.65 x 0.075 x 0.62 x 25 = 6.60 kN
End diaphragm = 0.775 x 0.075 x 0.62 x 2 = 0.90 kN
Total = 91.5 kN
Crane beams (CBI) = 4.95 x 0.9 x 0.5 x25 = 55.7 kN
UDL = 1.72 x 25 = 43.0 kN/m
Crane beam (CB2) = 5.65 x 0.9x 0.5 x 25 = 63.6 kN
UDL = 0.99 x 25 = 24.8 kN/m
Crane beam (CB3) = 5.65 x 0.9 x 0.5 x25 = 63.6 kN
UDL = 1.66 x 25 = 41.5 kN/m

Superimposed Dead Loads (SIDL)

Intensity of SIDL = 0.08 x 24 = 1.92 kN/m2

Main beam (MB1, MB2 & MB3)

In-situ Portion = 0.6 x 1.92 = 1.2 kN/m

Cantilever Portion = 1.882 x 1.92 = 3.6 kN/m

Total = 4.8 kN/m

Main beam (MB4, MB5)

In-situ Portion = 0.6 x 1.92 = 1.2 kN/m

Secondary Beams (SBI)

Point load due to Secondary = 5.65 x 1.02 x 1.92 = 11.1 kN/m

beams

UDL due to secondary beams = 1 x 1.02 x 1.92 = 2.0 kN/m

22
Crane beam (CB1)

In-situ slab = 1 x 1.72 x 1.92 = 3.3 kN/m

Crane beam (CB2)

In-situ slab = 1 x 0.99 x 1.92 = 1.9 kN/m

Crane beam (CB3)

In-situ slab = 1 x 1.66 x 1.92 = 3.19 kN/m

4.1.5 Live Loads (LL)

There are three live loads considered as follows,

General UDL on the deck

Uniformly Distributed Load

Live load intensity = 75 kN/m2

Main beam (MB1, MB2& MB3)

In-situ Portion = 0.6 x 75 = 45.0 kN/m

Cantilever portion = 1.882 x 75 = 141.2 kN/m

Total = 186.2 kN/m

Main beam (MB4, MB5)

In-situ Portion = 0.6 x 75 = 45.0 kN/m

Secondary beams (SB)

Point load due to Secondary = 5.65 x 1.02 x 75 = 432.2 kN/m

beams

UDL due to secondary beams = 1 x 1.02 x 75 = 76.5 kN/m

Crane beam (CB1)

In-situ slab = 1 x 1.72 x 75 = 129.0 kN/m

Crane beam (CB2)

23
In-situ slab = 1 x 0.99 x 75 = 74.3 kN/m

Crane beam (CB3)

In-situ slab = 1 x 1.66 x 75 = 124.5 kN/m

Wheel loads of container quay crane

Referring to the manufacturer’s data we have following loadings (Ref.1)

There are total 32 wheels i.e. 8 wheels per leg

Maximum wheel load = 700 kN spaced at 1.25m c/c

Load from outriggers of 100t capacity Harbour Mobile Crane

Referring to the manufacturer’s data we have following loadings, (Ref.1)

Load intensity = 243 kN/m2

This intensity is acting over the area of = 4.5 x 2 m

UDL of 4.5m due to this load = 243 x 2 = 486 kN/m

4.1.6 Berthing Load (BL)

Vessel Data (Refer page 6 of IS: 4651 part III) (Ref.6)

DW = 89000 MT

LOA = 260 MT

LBP = 235 m

Beam = 42 m

Draught = 14 m

Berthing Speed = 0.15 m/s

Berthing angle = 100

DT = 1.25 x 89000 = 111250 MT

24
Berthing Energy = (4.1)

Where, WD = Displacement Tonnage (DT) of the vessel

V = Velocity of Vehicle in m/s

Cm = Mass coefficient

Ce = Eccentricity coefficient

Cs = Softness coefficient

Ultimate energy to be catered for = 1.4 x 85.24 = 119.34 T-m

4.1.7 Mooring force

Referring to the Table 4 of IS 4651 Part III (Ref.6)

We get for 100 000 DT vessels Line pull = 100 MT

Hence for structural design purpose a load of 1000 kN is considered at any one
bollard in one platform at a time.

4.1.8 Seismic Force

Visakhapatnam Port lies in Zone III

Referring Table 2 of IS: 1893 – 1984 (Ref.7)

We get, a0= 0.04

Ah= b x I x a0 = 1 x 1 x 0.04 (4.2)

= 0.04

Seismic forces due to Dead Loads (DL)

Self-weight of pile (Buoyant) (considered being on conservative side)

Main berth = 19.9 x 0.04 = 0.80 kN/m

Main berth = 17.0 x 0.04 = 0.68kN/m

25
Pile muff = 36.1 x 0.04 = 1.45 kN

Main beam (MB1)

Precast portion = 61.875 x 0.04 = 2.48 kN

In-situ Portion = 16.25 x 0.04 = 0.65 kN

Total = 3.31 kN

In-situ Portion (stage 1) = 12.5 x 0.04 = 0.5 kN/m

In-situ Portion (stage 2) = 16.5 x 0.04 = 0.66kN/m

Cantilever slab = 18.82 x 0.04 = 0.75 kN/m

Total = 1.41 kN/m

Main beam (MB2)

Precast portion = 61.875 x 0.04 = 2.48 kN/m

In-situ Portion = 16.25 x 0.04 = 0.65 kN/m

Total = 3.13 kN/m

In-situ Portion (stage 1) = 12.5x 0.04 = 0.50 kN/m

In-situ Portion (stage 2) = 16.5 x 0.04 = 0.66 kN/m

Cantilever slab = 18.82 x 0.04 = 0.75 kN/m

Total = 1.91 kN/m

Main beam (MB3)

Precast portion = 61.875 x 0.04 = 2.48 kN/m

In-situ Portion = 16.25 x 0.04 = 0.65 kN/m

Total = 3.13 kN/m

In-situ Portion (stage 1) = 12.5 x 0.04 = 0.50 kN/m

In-situ Portion (stage 2) = 16.5 x 0.04 = 0.66 kN/m

Cantilever slab = 18.82 x 0.04 = 0.75 kN/m

26
Total = 1.19 kN/m

Main beam (MB4)

Precast portion = 61.875 x 0.04 = 2.48 kN

In-situ Portion = 16.25 x 0.04 = 0.65 kN

Total = 3.13 kN

In-situ Portion (stage 1) = 12.5 x 0.04 = 0.50 kN/m

In-situ Portion (stage 2) = 16.5 x 0.04 = 0.66 kN/m

Total = 1.16 kN/m

Main beam (MB5)

Precast portion = 61.875 x 0.04 = 2.48 kN/m

In-situ Portion = 16.25 x 0.04` = 0.65 kN/m

Total = 3.13 kN/m

In-situ Portion (stage 1) = 12.5 x 0.04 = 0.50 kN/m

In-situ Portion (stage 2) = 16.5 x 0.04 = 0.66 kN/m

Total = 1.16 kN/m

Secondary beam (SB)

Point load due to Secondary Beams

Deck Slab = 36.0 x 0.04 = 1.44 kN/m
Secondary beam = 48.0 x 0.04 = 1.92 kN/m
Sacrificial flanges = 9.5 x 0.04 = 0.38 kN/m
End diaphragm = 1.3 x 0.04 = 0.05 kN/m
Total = 3.80 kN/m

27
Crane beams (CB1) = 55.7 x 0.04 = 2.23 kN/m
UDL = 43.0 x 0.04 = 1.72 kN/m
Crane beam (CB2) = 63.6 x 0.04 = 2.54 kN/m
UDL = 24.8 x 0.04 = 0.99 kN/m
Crane beam (CB3) = 63.6 x 0.04 = 2.54 kN /m
UDL = 41.5 x 0.04 = 1.66 kN/m

Seismic forces due to superimposed dead Loads (SIDL)

Main beam (MB1,MB2,&MB)
In-situ Portion = 1.2 x 0.04 = 0.05 kN/m
Cantilever Portion = 3.6 x 0.04 = 0.14 kN/m
Main beam (MB4,MB5)
In-situ Portion = 1.2 x 0.04 = 0.05kN/m
Point load due to secondary beams = 11.1 x 0.04 = 0.44 kN
UDL due to secondary beams = 2.0 x 0.04 = 0.08
kN/m

Crane beam (CB1)

In-situ Slab = 1.9 x 0.04 = 0.08 kN/m
Crane beam (CB2)
In-situ Slab = 3.3 x 0.04 = 0.13 kN/m
Crane beam (CB3)
In-situ slab = 3.2 x 0.04 = 0.13 kN/m

Seismic force due to live loads (LL)

Main beam (MB1, MB2, &MB3)
In-situ Portion = 45.0 x 0.04 = 1.80 kN/m
Main beam (MB4,MB)
In-situ Portion = 45.0 x 0.04 = 1.80 kN/m
Cantilever Portion = 141.2 x 0.04 = 5.65 kN/m
Total = 7.40 kN/m

28
Point load due to secondary beams = 432.2 x 0.04 = 17.29 kN
UDL due to secondary beams = 76.5 x 0.04 = 3.06 kN/m
Crane beam (CB1)
In-situ Slab = 74.3 x 0.04 = 2.97 kN/m
Crane beam (CB2)
In-situ Slab = 129.0 x 0.04 = 5.16 kN/m
Crane beam (CB3)
In-situ slab = 124.5 x 0.04 = 4.98 kN/m
Above same forces will applied in x direction

4.1.9 Earth Pressure Load

γ = 18 kN/m2

Ø = 350

Ka = 0.27

H = 3.50 m

EP = ka x γ x H = 0.27 × 18 × 3.50 = 17.07 kN/m (4.3)

Force = 0.50 x EP x H = 0.5 x 17.07 x 3.50 = 29.88 kN

Apply 30 KN force in positive X direction as Earth Pressure force

4.1.10 Load Combinations

Basic Load combinations Limit State of Serviceability and Limit State of

Collapse are considered as shown below in Table 5.1as per IS: 4651 part 4. (Ref.8)

29
 Table 4.1 Load Combination
Limit State of Collapse

Loads 1 4 12 13 14 8
Number
Load DL LL EP BL ML SL
Combination

201 1.5 1.5 1.0 1.5

202 1.5 1.5 1.0 1.5

203 1.5 1.5 1.0 1.5

204 1.2 1.2 1.0 1.5

205 0.9 0.9 1.0 1.5

Limit State of Serviceability

101 1 1 1

102 1 1 1 1

103 1 1 1 1

4.2 ANALYSIS
Deck slab and secondary beams will be analysed separately
spanning on Continuous supports. The structure model shall consist of a space frame
of piles, main beams and longitudinal beams connected to piles. The effect of the
slab acting as a rigid Diaphragm will be considered using an appropriate modelling
technique. The fixity depth of piles will be considered in rock at about 1.5 m below
weathered rock top level. The whole system will be analyzed as a space frame using
standard structural Analysis software STAAD.Pro V8i. Various loads are shown in
the Figure 4.7.

30
 Fig. 4.7 STAAD.Pro V8i MODEL

Fig 4.8 Maximum compression obtained from STAAD.Pro

31
 The above STAAD.Pro result as shown in above Figure4.8 shows that
the maximum load acting on the pile is 3969.15 Compression, (which has been
highlighted). Using STAAD.Pro V8i value the design of the pile is done.

4.3 DESIGN
4.3.1 Design of Pile Foundation
A foundation which derives its main strength and stability from the
property of depth of foundation is called deep foundation. Even the shallow
foundation does derive strength from its depth. However the influence of the depth of
foundation plays a vital role on deep foundations. The design of foundation has two
distinct parts. The design of depth and size of foundation is controlled by soil
characteristics. The deep foundations can be classified into two main groups:
1. Pile foundations
2. Well foundations
The pile foundations can further be classified into three parts based on
the behavior and they are
a. Bearing piles
Friction piles
b. Compaction piles
Based on the construction method, the piles can be classified as:
a. Precast piles
b. Cast-in-situ piles (Bored piles)

A pile which transmits the load to the soil through bearing at the tip of
the pile is called a bearing pile. A hard strata or rocky strata should be available at a
reasonable depth below the ground level and the soil above the rocky soil is
relatively stiff or soft variety for providing bearing piles. An investigation on the soil
profiles and its properties need to be carried out to determine the possibility of
establishing the bearing piles. If the hard strata are too far below the ground level,
the relative economics of friction of the bearing piles need to be investigated. A pile
when rests on a hard strata, its tendency to settle is minimized, consequently friction

32
between the soil and the pile along its depth will not be generated. A combination
action of bearing cum frictional reaction in case of piles resting on a hard rock is
normally not possible. The bearing capacity of the rock and the bearing area of the
pile decide the capacity of the pile. The ultimate capacity of the pile is given by
Qu = Ap Po (4.4)
Where,
Ap = bearing area of the pile at tip.
Po = ultimate bearing capacity of the rock.

Foundation piles are subjected to normally axial compression, bending

moment and shear force of which axial force dominates. They are designed as short
column in most cases. The bending moment on the pile cap causes axial force and a
secondary bending moment on the pile. The lateral force on the pile cap causes
transverse shear and bending moment on the pile. The lateral load carrying capacity
of a pile depends not only on the structural strength but also on the sub grade
modules. As the lateral deflection of the pile takes place, the top portion of the pile
will act as a cantilever. The cantilever span of the pile is a function of the horizontal
sub grade property. As per suggestion of the Indian Code of Practice, the equivalent
cantilever can be obtained with the help of graphs. First estimate the value of
horizontal sub grade reaction ks or the modulus of sub grade reaction kc from the
Table 4.2.
Table 4.2Value of ks
Sand ks(N/mm2)
Dry Submerged
Loose 0.026 0.015
Medium 0.078 0.053
Dense 0.210 0.125

A set of minimum reinforcement requirements as recommended by the

Indian Code of Practice is listed below:

33
 a. Minimum main reinforcement shall be as follows 1.25% for pile whose
length is less than 30 times the least size (that is L/b <= 30, where b is the
least dimension).
b. Minimum lateral reinforcement (ties) is controlled by 0.6% at each ends of
the pile of about three times depth and 0.2% in the body of the pile.
The ties must be as close as possible at the driving end. The minimum
covers to the ties should be 40mm in ordinary condition of exposure and 50mm in
corrosive exposure condition.
4.3.2 Design of Pile Cap
A reinforced concrete slab or block which interconnects a group of piles
and acts as a medium to transmit the load from wall or column to the pile is called a
pile cap. Dispersion of load from the column or reaction from the pile cap is at
450angle. The critical section of bending moment and shear force depend on the
general arrangement of the pile and the pile cap. The following minimum
requirements must be met while designing the pile cap (Ref.9)
a. Minimum thickness is governed by
i. Minimum anchorage length of the main reinforcement of the column
and that of the pile.
ii. Rigid enough to distribute the load uniformly to the piles. Span to
thickness ratio of the cap should be less than 5.
iii. 300mm thickness at the free edge and 500 mm thickness in the body
of the cap.
b. Clear overhang of the pile cap beyond the outermost pile should be 150 mm.
c. A leveling course of 75 mm thick lean concrete must be provided.
d. Clear cover to the main reinforcement shall be 60 mm.
e. Pile should project at least 50 mm into the pile cap.

4.3.3 Design of Piles

Design of pile is done in STAAD.Pro V8i itself.
Fck (characteristic strength) = 35 N/mm2
Diameter of the outer piles = 1300 mm
Diameter of the inner piles = 1200 mm

34
Unsupported Length = 9.1 m
Diameter of main rebar = 28 mm
Diameter of helical rebar = 10 mm
Summary of Results follows , as shown in Tables 4.3, 4.4, 4.5 , 4.6.
Table 4.3 1300 mm diameter Piles
Member Load Pu Mz Mx MR SM TM
No Case kN kNmm kNmm kNmm kNmm kNmm

130 201 3535.33 430.86 2346.8 2386 714.31 3100.3

Table 4.4 1200 mm diameter Piles

Member Load Pu Mz Mx MR SM TM
No Case kN kNmm kNmm kNmm kNmm kNmm
131 203 3983.95 601.82 1827.9 1924.4 872.03 2796.4

Table 4.5 1300 mm diameter Piles

Member Load Pu/FckD2 Mu/FckD3 P/Fck Pt in % Ast Reqd
No Case mm2
130 201 0.06 0.04 0.02 0.7 9291.3

Table 4.6 1200 mm diameter Piles

Member Load Pu/FckD2 Mu/FckD3 P/Fck Pt in % Ast Reqd
No Case mm2

131 203 0.08 0.046 0.03 1.05 11875

Where,
Pu =Axial Load
Mz =Moment in z-axis
Mx = Moment in x-axis
MR = Resultant Moment
SM = Slenderness Moment
TM = Total Moment
Provide 18 nos T 28 bars as main reinforcement in 1300mm diameter piles.
Ast provided = 11804 mm2 > 9291.3 mm2 Hence OK

35
Provide 20 nos T 28 bars as main reinforcement in 1200mm diameter piles.
Ast provided = 12315 mm2 > 11875 mm2 Hence OK
Provide T 10 helical at 200mm Centre to Centre throughout the length of all piles.

4.3.4 Design of Beams

A structure is to be designed to provide a satisfactory performance under

different forces acting on it. It should not only serve purpose for which it is designed
but it should also provide adequate safety against failure under most severe load
condition. The limit state design considers the different limits, and designs to
structure for satisfactory serviceability and adequate safety against failure.
1. Strength limit state
2. Serviceability limit state
3. Durability limit state
The design based on the strength limit state ensures adequate and
reasonable safety of the structure against total or partial collapse. During the service
condition, the structure should provide security and serviceability. The limits of
serviceability are usually associated with
a. Deflection tolerances are controlled either by the appearance of the
overall structure or by tolerances of the other elements such as cladding,
floor finish or psychological factors.
b. Crack width limits which are to be controlled so as to prevent corrosion
of steel, deterioration of concrete and ugly appearance or other
detrimental influences.
c. Shrinkage and creep deflections or stress.
d. Strain limits in working, creep and collapse load conditions.
The durability limit state is associated with the total life and serviceability
of the structure when the structure is subjected to environmental or repeated loads.
The cover of the reinforcement should be provided to protect the reinforcement from
corrosion. Design should be made to provide resistance against wear and tear, and
repeated or fatigue type of forces.

36
Design Procedure
To fix the size of the beam: Breadth and depth of the beam section.
Section of beam the breadth of the beam must be such as to accommodate the
necessary reinforcement. Often this is selected from architectural considerations.
Generally a beam is satisfactory when its breadth is between half the effective depth
to two third the effective depth .Estimate the loads on the beam which consists of the
external live load, external dead load and the dead load of the beam itself. IS 456-
2000 furnishes the bending moment for dead load and live load at various points on
the beam such as near middle of end span, at support etc. Pt – the percentage of
reinforcement is read from the Table 4.5 and 4.6 of design aids. The area of
reinforcement is then calculated and the diameter of rods is determined.

4.3.5 Design of Main Beam

A main beam is a structural element that is capable of withstanding load
primarily by resisting bending. The bending force induced into the material of the
beam as a result of the external loads, own weight, span and external reactions to
these loads is called a bending moment. The main beam is the structural beam that
supports the secondary and crane beams. It is of greater thickness and of the highest
strength among all the types of beams used.
Following pages contain Detailed Design of Main
Beam:
Location: Berth
Type: MB (Precast +In-situ)
Grade of concrete: M35
Grade of Reinforcement: Fe 415
Clear cover to main reinforcement 50 mm
Bar diameter for top steel 28 mm
Bar diameter for bottom steel 28 mm

Design Procedure
This beam will be designed for two stages as follows:
Precast as simply supported beam on the transverse beam for the

37
dead load and self weight of the concrete, with the force
obtained from STAAD.Pro V8i. Continuous dead load of
secondary beams and super imposed dead loads are considered
below.

Stage 1
In this stage slab will be simply supported on longitudinal
beam. Size of precast beam
= 1000 × 500 mm
Self-weight = 1×0.5×25 = 12.50 kN/m
In-situ concrete = 1×0.5×26 = 13.50 kN/m
Working going load = 1.000 × 2 = 2.00 kN/m
Total = 27.50 kN/m
Maximum span lesser of = 4550 + 200 = 4750 mm
= 4550 + 434 = 4984 mm
Hence span = 4.75 m

Maximum B.M = = 77.56 kN

deff required = (4.5)

= 155 mm
deff. Provided = 500 – 50 – 16
= 434 mm > d eff required …. Hence OK
Ast = 759 mm2

Stage 2
In this stage beam has been designed as continuous over three spans for
dead load of Secondary beams and UDL of in-situ portion of main beam. Dead load
considered in the Stage I will not be considered here. Load acting on the beam is
shown in Figure 4.8.
In-situ concrete = 11 × 0.6 × 26 = 17.16 kN/m
Working gang load =1×2 = 2.00 kN/m

38
Total = 19.16 kN/m
121.3 kN (each)

6250 mm 6250 mm 6250mm

Fig 4.8 Load acting on Main Beam
Max positive BM = 191.65 kN
Max negative BM = 3883 kN
Max Shear Force = 367.97 kN

Check for deflection

deff required = = 347 mm

(Ref.eqn 4.5)
deff provided = 100 – 50 – 42
= 908 mm > deff required….Hence OK
Reinforcement Investigation for hogging moment
2
Ast (positive) II = 1821 mm
2
Ast (positive) II = 888 mm
Provide 4 Nos of diameter 25 mm bars
2
Ast (negative) II = 1963 mm > 1821 mm2 …..Hence OK

Stage 2
Dead Load acting on the main beam is considered in stage I and II.
So STAAD.Pro V8i analysis of structure is done for all loads other than dead loads.
Following results are obtained from the analysis:
Maximum. Positive B.M. = 1506.23 kN-m (Factored)
Maximum negative B.M. = 753.12 kN-m (Factored)

39
Check for deflection

deff required =

(Ref eqn.4.5)
= 510 mm
deff provided = 2100 – 50 – 16
= 2034 mm > deff required….. Hence OK.
Reinforcement Investigation for hogging moment
Ast(positive) II = 1036 mm2
Provide 7 Nos of diameter 28 mm bars
Ast = 4310 mm2 > 1036 mm2 Hence OK.
Ast (positive) II = 759 + 888 + 2095
= 3741 mm2
Provide 8 Nos of diameter 28 mm bars
Ast (positive) II = 4926 mm2 > 3741 mm2 Hence OK.

Check for shear

Stage 1

Shear force =

= 65.31 kN

tvI =

= 0.226 N/mm2
Ast = 4926 mm2 = 1.14 %
Referring Table 19 of IS: 456-2000 (Ref.9) tc = 0.70 N/mm2

min = = 1.11 mm2

Provide 12 diameter 2-legged stirrups @ 300 mm c/c

Gives = 1.51 mm2/mm > required Hence OK

Max shear force = 367.97 kN

40
 tv II = = 0.608 N/mm2 (Ref.11)

Ast = 4926 mm2 = 0.54 %

Referring Table 19 of IS: 456-2000 (Ref.9) tc = 0.52 N/mm2

min = 0.4×1000 = 1.11 mm2

Provide 12 diameter 2-legged stirrups @ 300 mm c/c

Gives = 1.51 mm2/mm > required Hence OK

Stage 2
Max shear force = 1039 kN

tv II = = 0.851 N/mm2 (Ref.11)

Ast I+ reqd = 4310 mm2 = 0.47 %

Referring Table 19 of IS: 456-2000 (Ref.9) tc = 0.49 N/mm2

= × bw (4.6)

= 1.98 mm2

min =

= 0.66 mm2
Provide 16 diameter 2-legged stirrups @ 150 mm c/c

Gives = 5.36 mm2/mm > required…Hence OK

4.3.6 Design of Secondary Beam

A secondary beam is the structural beam that transfers load to the
primary (main) beam present. In the berth structure, it connects the main beam that
connects to the pile below. The design of these beams are quite complex as they
support the entire slab system. In particular the behavior of the shear studs for
various decking systems (which connect the slab to the beam) is extremely
important and complex.
Following pages contain detailed design of Secondary beam
Location : Berth

41
Type : SB (Precast + In-situ)
Grade of concrete : M35
Grade of reinforcement : Fe415
Clear cover to main reinforcement 50 mm
Bar diameter for top steel 28 mm
Bar diameter for bottom steel 28 mm

Design Procedure
This beam will be designed in two stages as follows:
 Precast as simply supported beam on precast transverse beam for D.L +
Weight of green concrete + load of working gang.
 Force obtained from STAAD.Pro V8i analysis of structure.

Stage 1
Size of precast beam = 900×850 mm
Load Calculation
Self-weight = 0.9 × 0.85 × 25 = 19.13 kN/m
In-situ concrete = 1.1 × 0.6 × 26 = 17.16 kN/m
Working gang load =1×2 = 2.00 kN/m
Total = 38.29 kN/m
Maximum span lesser of 6050 + 200 = 6250 mm
6050 +784 = 6834 mm
Hence span = 6.25 m

Maximum B.M = = 186.94 kNm

deff required =

(Ref. eqn. 4.5)

= 254 mm
deff provided = 850-50-16 = 784 mm
Required….Hence OK.

42
Ast I+ reqd = 1008 mm2

Stage 2
Dead load acting on the secondary beam is considered in stage 1.
So steady analysis of structure is done for all loads than dead loads.
Following results are obtained from the analysis:
Maximum positive B.M = 287.47 kN/m (Factored)
Maximum negative B.M = 582.45 kN (Factored)
Check for Deflection

deff required =

(Ref. eqn. 4.5)

= 448 mm
deff provided = 2100-50-16 = 2034 mm
deff required…Hence OK
Reinforcement Investigation for Hogging Moment
Ast (negative) II = 800 mm
Provide 7 Nos of diameter 28 mm bars
Ast = 4310 mm² ˃ 800 mm² Hence OK
Ast(positive) II = 393 mm²
Total Ast(positive) =1008 + 393 = 1401 mm²
Provide 8 Nos of diameter 28 mm bars
Ast(postive) II = 4926 mm² ˃ 1401 mm² Hence OK

Check for Shear

Stage 1

Shear force = = 119.64 kN

v I = = 0.254 N/mm²

(Ref.11)
Ast I+ reqd = 4926 mm² = 0.70 %

43
Referring Table 19 IS: 456-2000 (Ref.9)

min = 0.4 × 1000 = 1.11 mm²

Provide 12 diameter 2-legged stirrups @ 300 mm c/c

= 1.51 mm² /mm ˃ required hence OK

Stage 2
Maximum shear force = 1039 kN

v II = = 0.851 N/mm

Ast I+ reqd = 4310 mm² = 0.35 %

Referring Table 19 of IS: 456-2000 (Ref.9) tc = 0.43 N/mm²

= × bw
(Ref. eqn 4.5)
= 1.12 mm²

min = = 0.66mm²/mm

Provide 16 diameters 4 –legged stirrups @ 150 mm in c/c

= 5.36 mm² > required…………..Hence OK.

4.3.7 Design of Crane Beam

Type: CB
(Precast + In-situ)
Grade of concrete: M35
Grade of Reinforcement: Fe415
Clear cover to main reinforcement 50 mm
Bar diameter for top steel 25mm
Bar diameter for bottom steel 25 mm

Design Procedure
The beam will be designed in two stages as follows
Precast as simply supported beam on transverse beam for D.L Weight

44
of concrete + load of working gang .Force obtained from STAAD.Pro
Simply supported on pile muffs for weight of green concrete.

Stage 1
In this stage the beam will be simply supported on pile
Portion of slab supported by this beam 156 m
Size of precast beam: 900 x 500 mm
In-situ portion 900 x 600 mm
Loads calculations
Self-weight 0.9 x 0.5 x 25 = 11.25 kN/m
In-situ portion of beam 0.9x 0.6 x 26 = 14.04 kN/m
Working gang load 0.9 x 2 = 1.80 kN/m
Total = 27.09 kN/m
Maximum Span lesser of 3706+ 200 = 3906 mm
3 7 0 6 + 437.5 = 4143.mm
Hence span = 3.906m

Maximum B.M. =

= 51.66kN-m

deff. Required = (Ref. eqn. 4.5)

= 134 mm
deff. Provided = 500 - 50- 12.5
= 437.5mm > deff required ...Hence O.K.

Ast = 498 mm2

Stage 2
Loads calculations
In-situ slab = 1.5× 0.5× 26
= 19.50 kN/m
Maximum Span lesser of 3706 + 200
= 3906 mm

45
 3706 +437.5
= 4143.5 mm
Hence span = 3.906 m

Maximum B.M. = = 37.19 kN-m

deff required =

(Ref. eqn. 4.5)

= 113 mm
deff. provided = 1100 - 50 - 12.5 = 1037.5 mm

> deff Required ...Hence O.K.

Ast required = 49mm 2

Stage 3
In this stage beam will be designed as continuous seven spans for superimposed dead load
and Live load. Loads considered in the earlier stages will not be considered.
Wearing coat load = 1.5 6 x 0.08 x 24 = 3. 00 kN/m
Live loads
Loads specifically on the crane beams:
a. Wheel loads of unloader of 1000 Tonnes
b. Load from outriggers of 100t capacity Harbour Crane
Referring to the manufacturer's data we have following load
There are total 32 wheels
Maximum wheel load = 700 kN with spacing of 1250 mm
Load intensity = 220 kN/m2
This intensity is acting over the area of = 4.5 x 2.0 m
UDL of 4.5m due to this load = 222 × 20
= 440 kN/m
Crane beam will be analysed for both these loads in standar
d software package STAAD.Pro V8i
From the results of the analysis we have,

46
Maximum. positive B.M = 826.12 kN-m
Maximum negative BM = 413.1 kN-m

Check for deflection

deff required = (Ref. eqn. 4.5)

= 378 mm
deff provided = 1450 - 50 - 37.5

= 1362.5 mm > deff. required ...Hence O.K

Reinforcement Investigation for hogging moment

Ast (negative) II = 1276 mm2
Check for minimum reinforcement:
Ast min = 2514 mm2
Provide 9 Nos diameter 32 mm bars
AstI+ reqd = 7238 mm2> 2514 mm2 Hence O.K.
Ast (positive) III = 2585 mm 2
Total Ast (positive) = 498 + 149 + 2 5 85 =3232 mm 2
Provide 8 Nos diameter 28 mm bars
Ast (positive) = 4926 mm2> 3232mm2 Hence O.K.

Check for shear

Stage 1

Shear force =

= 52.91 kN

v I =

= 0.202 kN/mm2

47
Stage 2

Shear force =

= 38.08 kN

v II =

= 0.0 61 N/mm2
Stage 3
Maximum Shear force = 793.1 kN

v III =

= 0.970N/mm2
Ast = 4926 mm2
= 0.40%
Referring Table 19 of IS:456-2000 (Ref.9)
c = 0.516 N/mm2

= × bw (Ref.eqn.4.5)

= × 0.202

=1.59 mm 2/mm

min
= = 0.89 mm2

Provide 16diameter 4legged stirrups @140 mm c/c

Gives = 5.74 mm2/mm > required hence O.K.

4.3.8 Design of Deck Slab

Location Berth
Type In-situ
Grade of Concrete M 35
Grade of Reinforcement Fe415
Thickness of Slab 250 mm

48
Bar diameter for main steel 16 mm
Clear cover to main reinforcement 45 mm
Effective Depth of Slab 197 mm
Loads of Deck slab
This slab will be subjected to following loads
i) Dead Load
ii) Superimposed Dead Load
iii) Live Load a) UDL of 7.5 T/m2
b) Class AA Wheeled Loading as per IRC 6-2000
c) Container Load
d) Steel coil Load
e) 40T Reach stacker Load
f) Straddle Carrier
Dead Loads
Thickness of slab = 250 mm
Self-Weight = 0.25 × 25 = 6.25 kN / m2
Superimposed Dead Loads
Maximum thickness of wearing coat = 80 mm

Weight of wearing coat = 0.08 × 24 = 1.92 kN/m2

Live Loads
a) UDL OF 7.5 T/m2
b) Class AA Wheeled load as per IRC 6-2000 Section II(Ref.4)
Maximum load of one wheel = 6.25 T
Maximum load of single axle = 20 T
Ground contact area of wheels = 300 × 150 mm
c) Container Loads:
Two containers of 30 T each will sit on platform with four legs.
Load on each leg = 15 T
Ground contact area of leg = 175 × 175 mm
d) Steel Coil
Weight of the steel coil = 25 T

49
 Length of the steel coil = 1500 mm
Outer diameter of steel coil = 1720 mm
Inner diameter of steel coil = 500 mm

Analysis of Deck slab

Seven continuous spans have been considered for the analysis
Maximum span = 4800 mm
(Clear span, as per Clause 22.2. b.1) (Ref.9)
Dead Load moments
Maximum positive B.M = 0.077 × 8.17 × 4.80 = 14.49 kNm
2
Maximum negative B.M = 0.107 × 8.17 × 4.80 = 20.14 kNm
Maximum Shear force = 0.607 × 8.17 × 4.80 = 23.80 kNm
Shear Stress due to Dead Load

v1 =

v1= 0.181 N/mm2

Live Loads
Maximum UDL = 75 kN/m2

Following positions of live loads have been considered for analysis

Live load moments:
Maximum positive B.M = 0.10 × 75.00 × 4.802 = 172.80 kNm
Maximum negative B.M = 0.121 × 75.00 × 4.802 = 209.09 kNm
Factored Maximum positive BM = 1.5 × 172.80 = 259.20 kNm
Factored Maximum negative BM = 1.5 × 209.09 = 313.63 kNm
Maximum Shear Force = 0.607 × 75.00 × 4.80 = 218.52 kNm

Shear Stress due to Live load

= 1.664 /mm2

50
 40T Reach Stacker loading is critical in all above mentioned live loads.
So Slab is design for Reach stacker loading Single wheel is placed at the centre of
span For calculating Maximum BM and shear force due to the Reach stacker loading,
Reach stacker load is placed over deck slab in both directions in a STAAD.Pro V8i
model and maximum moments and shear forces are taken. Effective Width
calculation (Ref.12)
As per IRC 21:2000, Clause No. 305.16: Effective width is calculated by formula

(4.7)

Table`4.7 Bending moments

A bef
Effective
a=b+ X Lo Α (effective Remark
Load in T
(2×80) width of
Slab)
For positive
760 2400 4800 2.6 3880.00 13.07 Bending
Moment
Calculation
For negative
760 490 4800 2.6 1903.95 26.64 Bending
Moment
on
Increase this load by 25 % for impact, as per IRC 6-2000, Clause 211.3 (Ref.10)
Load with impact for positive MB = 16.34 T
Load with impact for negative BM = 33.40 T
Load dispersion in Longitudinal Direction = 600 + 160 + 197 = 957mm
For Maximum Positive Bending Moment Calculation

Uniformly Distributed Load of length 0.957 m = = 170.76

kN/m
For Maximum Negative Bending Moment Calculation

Uniformly Distributed Load of length 0.957 m = = 347.99

kN/m

51
This udl is placed on the continuous secondary beams and analysed in STAAD.Pro
V8i.
Maximum Positive Moment = 57.83 kNm
Maximum Negative Moment = 32.74 kNm
Maximum Shear Force = 192.00 kN
Calculate shear stress due to reach stacker loading

= 1.462 N/mm2
Table 4.8 Bending moment and Shear stress due to loads

Sno Loading BM (KNm) Shear

stress
Max +ve Max -ve
kN/m2
1 DL 14.49 20.14 0.181

2 LL 75 KN/m2 U D L 259.20 313.63 1.664

3 Reach Stacker Load 57.83 32.74 1.462

Design for Maximum Moments

Total positive B.M. = 14.49 + 57.83
= 72.32 kNm
Total negative B.M. = 20.14 + 32.74
= 52.88 kNm

deff. Required =

= 150 mm
deff. Provided = 250 – 45- 8 = 197 mm
> deff. Required....Hence OK
Ast positive required =1700 mm2
Provide T 16mm diameter @ 90 mm centre to centre spacing
Ast positive provided = 2234 mm2

52
 > 1700 mm2
Ast positive required = 1203 mm2
Provide T 12mm diameter @ 90 mm Centre to Centre spacing
Ast negative provided = 1257 mm2 > 1203 mm2 Hence O.K
Transverse Reinforcement

= 300 mm2

Provide T 10mm diameter @ 200mm Centre to Centre spacing top to bottom

Ast = 393 mm2 > 300 mm2
Check for Shear Force
Shear Stress for dead load + Reach Stacker load combination is critical so design the
slab for the same
(4.8)
1.643 N/mm2
Ast provided = 1436 mm2
Pt = 0.73 %
Referring Table 19 of IS: 456-2000 (Ref.9)
= 0.647 N/mm2

Design shear legs (4.9)

Where, Sx = Distance between transverse bars = 200 mm

Sy = Distance between main bars = 140 m

Ast required = 0.003 × 200× 140 mm2 = 77,262 mm2

Provide T 10 mm diameter shear legs @ 90 mm Centre to Centre spacing

4.3.9 FENDERS
The fenders provide necessary interface between the berthing ship and
berth structure. Therefore, the principle function of the fenders is to transform the
impact load from the berthing ship into reaction, which both the ship and berth
structure can safely sustain. It absorbs kinetic energy of the ship or vessel, berthing

53
against an off-shore structure like jetty, quay wall. Fenders are typically
manufactured out of rubber, foam, elastomer or plastic. There are various types of
fendering systems and their choice depends on the size of the berthing ship and
maximum impact energy. Fenders can generally be divided into 2 groups

Surface Protecting Fenders transmit high impact or reaction force to the

berth structure for each kNm energy absorbed i.e. the fender factor P/Eq is high.
Energy Absorbing Fenders transmit a low impact or reacting force to the quay
structure for each kNm energy absorbed i.e. the fender factor P/Eq is low.

Cylindrical Fenders are commonly used which ensures safe and linear
berthing for different kinds of vessels. They are an economical solution to protect
most berthing structures and provide ease of installation. Arch Fenders were
introduced to improve the performance of cylindrical fenders as they have a better
Energy/Reaction force ratio and recommended for all types of applications. The
shape of these fenders helps to dispatch stresses evenly. It is easy to install and are
maintenance free. Cone Fenders are recommended for all types of applications
including high tidal variation sites. This advanced feature of lesser height of fenders
improves material handling capabilities of deck/vessel cranes which reduce the
overall cost of the project. Due to the geometrical shape of the fenders, it can deflect
more and it can absorb more energy from any direction. Foam Elastomer Fenders are
typically made of closed cell, polyethylene foam core, which is encapsulated in
nylon or Kevlar reinforcement polyurethane skin. The performance of foam
elastomer fenders is comparable to that of pneumatic fenders, but the fenders will not
lose their function in case of skin gets puncture and they cannot deflate. Tug Boat
Fenders are made of high abrasion resistance rubber with good resilience properties.
They are very popular with small port craft owners and tug owners. These fenders
are compression moulded in high pressure thermic fluid heated moulds and have
excellent sea water resistance.

Designing a fender system basically is determining what the berthing

energy of a vessel or range of vessels will be, then determine what capacity the

54
fender needs to have to absorb that kinetic energy and finally how to find a way to
avoid the reaction force creating too much hull pressure. In principle, a berthing
energy calculation is a simple kinetic energy calculation, adjusted for specific
behavior of a berthing vessel or the specific characteristics of the berthing location or
structure. Types of Fenders (used in the container berth)

Fender 1: It is characterized as hard fender. They are also called as

Buckling type fenders or cell fenders and they are required in the deflection to absorb
the design energy than other side loaded cylindrical rubber fender. This causes
maximum reaction force to occur during almost every berthing. This fender has high
performance from the energy point of view, but not recommended when the tonnage
range of ships likely to berth extracts a very wide range of energies to be absorbed. It
is subjected to significant reduction in energy absorption capacity when subjected to
impact not perpendicular to the fender force.

Fender 2: It is characterized as medium fender and also called as Shear

and Flexible Fender. It is an alternative where the soil conditions are suiTable
because they can combine the functions of fender and berthing structures.

Fender 3: It is characterized as soft fender and is very popular where the

energy absorption requirements are not too high, but longer than Type 1 and this
requires greater reach of cargo handling equipment.

The spacing of fenders varies from berth structure to berth structure

depending on the type of structure, the requirement to be met by the berth and the
type of ship using the berth. The spacing will also depend on the fender height and
the compression of the fenders. Generally to ensure that all the ships can be
supported at the berth, the fender spacing will be about 5% to 10% of length of the
ships., about 20,000 DWT. For larger ships the spacing can be 25% to 50% of the
length of the ships, if the berth has with tug boat assistance as shown in Figure 4.9

55
 Fig. 4.9 Fenders (Ref.13)

The material used for solid type rubber fenders shall be natural or
synthetic rubber of high quality, having sufficient resiliency, and anti-aging,
weather-resistant properties to meet all normal service conditions. The maximum
stand of distance allowed is only 1m (1000mm) and spacing shall not exceed 20
MCK. The material shall be homogeneous without any defects, impurities, pores,
cracks and generally have the following properties as mentioned in Table 4.9.

56
 Table 4.9 Fender Materials (Ref.3)
PROPERTY REQUIREMENTS TESTINGSTANDARDS
Before Aging
Tensile Strength Minimum 160kg/cm2 ASTM D 412 Die or BS
903.A.2
Elongation Minimum 350% Same as above
Hardness Maximum 770 ASTM D 240 Shore
Durometa 903.A.2
After Aging (700 × 96 hours aging through the air heating)

Tensile Strength Not less than 80% of ASTM D 573 Die CBS
original value 903.A.2
Elongation Same as the above Same as the above
Hardness Original value + 80 max ASTM D2240 Shore A
Dmometer/BS 903.A.2
Tear Resistance Minimum 70kg/cm ASTM D624 Die b BS
903A.3
Compression Max 30% ASTMD395 BS 903A.6.A
set(700.Cx22 hours
heat treatment)
Abrasion Resistance Max 1.5CC B.S.B903 AG Method
C.3000 revolutions

4.3.10 Bollards
A Bollard is a short vertical post. Originally it meant a post used on a
ship or a quay, principally for mooring. The word now also describes a variety of
structures to control or direct road traffic, such as posts arranged in a line to obstruct
the passage of motor vehicles.

57
 Fig. 4.10 Bollards (Ref.14)
Bollards are available in standard size and shape. The selection of the
bollards depends on the mooring force of the particular type of the vessel as shown
above in the Figure 4.10.The shape of bollards is almost cylindrical with the small
projection at the top. The projection is made to protect the rope slipping out. The
bollards are buried inside concrete and the uplift caused because of mooring force is
resisted by bottom of the bollards which is buried in concrete.

Cast steel bollards shall be provide and fixed as shown in the Figure. The
working load on the each bollard is 150t. Each bollard shall be capable of
withstanding a load of 150t after fixing.

All bolts, nuts and washer etc. that are exposed shall be galvanized (hot
dipped) with zinc coating of 80microns thickness.
Mechanical and chemical test are carried out in accordance with IS 210 or equivalent
ASTM or British standard and the result are checked, Mechanical test pieces shall be

58
cast from the same batch of materials and at the same time as the bollards. Following
test shall be performed.
i. Tensile strength.
ii. Transverse strength.
iii. Brinell hardness.
The result of the all the test shall confirm to recommendation of the
standard followed. For every two bollards cost one test on each of the above
categories shall be performed. In addition to the above test bollards shall be x-ray
test at site before installation in position. All bollards are painted after installation
with one coat of prima red oxide zinc chrome paint conforming to 152074 “ready
mix paint red oxide zinc chrome, priming” and two coat of finishing paint of yellow
colour to is -2933,”enamel,exterior a) undercoating b)finishing.

4.3.11 Design of Office Building

The geographical location of an office building is an important factor for
occupying business. Easy access from roads, proximity to motorways, the airports,
trains etc makes it easy for the staff to travel to-from work. The office building is
located near the container berth such that the road network in the port if easily
connected through it.

4.3.11.1 Operational and Maintenance Factors

Ease of maintenance is particularly important as there are so many
different parts to communicate with. Open plan designs are felt to facilitate
maintenance as everything is more visible to maintain staff. The building should be
so designed so that everything is accessible from the atrium, roof and are strong
enough to walk upon or the need to go up there in the first place should be designed
out.

4.3.11.2 Environmental Factors

Thermal comfort in an office should not be too hot or too cold and the
temperature should not be erratic or have hot or cold spots. Electrical lighting are
inadequacy lighting have effects on performance, particularly if much of work is

59
carried out involves close reading. Access to windows and daylight can impact upon
occupant’s well-being and performance. Even in light building staffs may be
positioned too far from a window so that they sometimes feel the need to go outside
to walk around the building to compensate.

4.3.11.3 Planning and Layout

The plan layout is sketched in AutoCAD 2010. It is a Single storey with
all the norms and regulations followed. It is a 32.500 m × 30.000 m floor dimension.
The Ground Floor consists of 8 doors, 1 main door entrance, 5 connecting interior
doors and 2 back doors. The rooms consist of Kitchen cum store room, Assistant
Manager Room, P.A room, Data room, Reception/Help Desk and Cabin section. The
corridor joins the main rooms of the floor such as P.A room, reception, cabin section
and water closets. The First Floor consists of Audit section, Director Room and
Conference room. It consists of 10 doors, 1 main door entrance, 6 connecting interior
doors and 3 back doors.

4.3.11.4 STAAD.Pro V8i Model

Beams, columns and slab will be analysed spanning on continuous
supports. The structure model shall consist of a space frame of beams, columns and
slab. The effect of the slab acting as a rigid diaphragm will be considered using an
appropriate modelling technique. The fixity depth of foundation will be considered in
rock at about 1.5 m below weathered rock top level. The whole system will be
analyzed as a space frame using standard structural analysis software STAAD.Pro
V8i as shown in Figure 4.11

60
Fig.4.11 STAAD.Pro V8i 3D rendered view of Office Building

61
Fig. 4.12 Ground Floor Plan of Office Building
ALL DIMENSIONS ARE IN M

62
 Fig.4.13 First Floor Plan of Office Building
ALL DIMENSIONS ARE IN M

4.3.11.5 Design of Slab

L× = 5000 mm, Ly = 5000 mm

= = 1< 2, therefore it is a 2 way slab.

Assuming = 26 (IS 456: 2000) (Ref.9)

63
 = 26

Effective depth (d) = = 156.25 ~ 160 mm

Assuming 10 diameter bars

Clear cover = 20 mm

Total depth (D) = effective depth (d) + clear cover +

= 160 + 20 +

= 185 mm
Total depth (D) = 175mm
Effective depth (d) = 150 mm

Load estimation
Assume 1 m width.
Dead load 1 (self-weight) = 0.125 × 25 × 1 = 3.125 kN/m.
Dead load 2 (floor thickness) = 1 kN/m.
Live load (L.L) = 3 kN/m.
Total load (W) =D.L1 + D.L2 + D.L3 = 3.125+1+3 = 7.125 kN/m.
Wu (ultimate load) = 1.5 × W = 1.5 × 7.125 = 10.6875 kN/m.

Moment calculation
For 2 way slab (from Annex –D,Table- 26 , IS 456: 2000) (Ref.9)
Mx = αxWuL×2 (4.10)
Mx is calculated by equation (4.10)
Where,
Mx = Moment in short span direction
αx = Bending moment coefficient for short span
Wu= Ultimate load
Lx = Length in x direction
My = αyWuLy2 (4.11)
My is calculated by equation (4.11)

64
Where,
My = Moment in long span direction
αy = Bending moment coefficient for long span
Wu= Ultimate load
Ly = Length in y direction
For span L× = 5000 mm (shorter direction)
Positive moment at mid span = 0.024 × 10.6875 × 52
= 6.4125 kNm.
Negative moment at continuous edges = 0.032 × 10.6875 × 52
= 8.55 kNm.
For span Ly = 5000 mm
Positive moment at mid span = 0.035 × 10.6875× (5)2
= 9.3515 kNm.
Negative moment at continuous edges = 0.047 ×10.6875 × (5)2
= 12.5578 kNm
Considering highest of the above moments for the design
Therefore, Mu = 12.5578 kNm.

Check with Mu,lim

Mu = Mu,lim
Where,
Mu = Ultimate moment
Mu,lim = Ultimate limiting moment of resistance
12.5578 = 0.138 fck bd2
12.5578 = 0.138 × 25 × 103 × d2
dreq = 60.33 mm .
dprov. = 150 mm.
Since dprov.> dreq. , therefore it is safe.
Thus depth is governed by maximum of all the moments.
Area of steel required (Ast)
For span
L× (Mu,ma×= 8.55 kNm )

65
 Ast I+ reqd = (4.12)

Ast I+ reqd is calculated by equation (4.12)

Where,
Ast I+ reqd = Area of steel required
b = Width
d = Effective depth
fck = Characteristic compressive strength of concrete
fy = Yield stress of steel

R =

R =

R = 380 N/m

Ast reqd =

(Ref. eqn. 4.12)

Ast reqd = 143.45 mm2
Ast min. = 0.12% bD = 0.12% ×1000 × 175 = 210 mm2
Since Ast reqd > Ast min. (therefore safe).
Diameter of 1 bar = 10 mm
ast = = = 78.5 mm2

Spacing = (4.13)

Spacing is calculated by equation (4.13)

Where,
ast = Area of 1 bar
Ast reqd = Area of steel required

Spacing = = 547.23 ~550 mm c/c.

For Exterior panel

(ii) For span Ly (Mu,max.= 12.5578 kNm )

66
 Ast reqd =

(Ref. eqn. 4.12)

R =

R =

R = 558.124 kN/m2

Ast reqd =

(Ref. eqn. 4.12)

Ast reqd = 212.5 mm2
Ast min. = 0.12% bD = 0.12% ×1000 × 175
= 210 mm2
Since Ast reqd >Ast min. (therefore safe).
Diameter of 1 bar = 10 mm
ast = = = 78.5 mm2

Spacing = (Ref.eqn. 4.13)

= = 369.41 ~370 mm c/c

Check for shear

Shear force, Vu = (4.14)

Shear force is calculated by the equation (4.19)

Where,
W = Factored dead load
l = Effective length of beam

Shear force = = 26.71 kN

τv =

67
Where,
τv = Nominal shear stress
Vu = Design shear force
b = Width
d = Effective depth

τv = = 0.178 N/mm2

=
= 0.141
From Table 19, (IS 456: 2000), τc = 0.5 N/mm2 (Ref.9)
τc> τv, therefore it is safe.

Check for deflection

= = 33.33

( ) max =( ) basic × Kt (4.15)

= 26 × 1.4 (value of kt is obtained from IS 456: 2000) (Ref.9)

= 36.4

Since < ( ) max, therefore design is safe.

4.3.11.6 Design of Beam

The design of a reinforced concrete is to resist a given system of external
load involves the material properties and the skeletal demands and such as width and
depth are assumed based on specific guidelines. The cross sectional dimension
generally assumed to satisfy the serviceability criteria and housing of reinforced
cements with suiTable spacing and cover is required to estimate the dead loads and
moments.
Generally, beams may be of two types. They are:-
1. Singly reinforced beam.
2. Doubly reinforced beam.

68
 In case of singly reinforced beam, the main reinforcement is provided
near the face of the beam subjected to tension. While in case if doubly reinforced
beam, main reinforcement is provided near the face of the beam subjected to
compression as shown in Figure 4.14.The design parameters are mentioned below in
Table 4.10.

Fig.4.14 Reinforcement of Beam

Table 4.10 Design Parameter(Beam)
Design load and Design Parameter
Pu (Kns) 115.31
Mz (Kns – Mt) 0.88
My (Kns – Mt) 5.28
Fy (Mpa) 415
Fc (Mpa) 25
As Reqd (mm2) 356
As (%) 0.89
Bar Size 12

4.3.11.7 Design of Column

The column transfer load from beams and slabs to foundation.The cross
sectional dimension generally assumed to satisfy the serviceability criteria and
housing of reinforced cements with suiTable spacing and cover is required to
estimate the dead loads and moments, as shown in Figure 4.15. In an ideal column
under an axial load, the column remains straight until the critical load is reached. The
design parameters are mentioned in Table 4.11.

69
 Fig.4.15 Reinforcement of Column
Table4.11 Design Parameter (Column)
Design load and Design Parameter
Pu (Kns) 156.61
Mz (Kns – Mt) 7.26
My (Kns – Mt) 6.44
Fy (Mpa) 415
Fc (Mpa) 25
As Reqd (mm2) 1264
As (%) 2.68
Bar Size 12

70
 CHAPTER 5

CONCLUSION

5.1 CONCLUSION
In this project, the concept of offshore structures is exploited and
feasibility of construction of large scale transportation systems like port on a water
body was analysed. And also planning, analysis and design of Berth was done. The
planning of Berth structure was done according to Indian Standard recommendations.
The planning was done using software AutoCAD 2010. The planning of Berth was
followed by analysis using software STAAD.Pro V8i. The structural behaviour of the
berth structures were observed under various loading conditions such as loads due to
self weight of the concrete, crane load, mooring load, berthing load and earth
pressure load for were all accounted for. Then based on critical bending moments
and shear force, the designing was done. The design of pile, main beam, secondary
beam, crane beam was done manually as per Indian Standard codes. The design of
slab was done as per Indian Road Congress recommendations. This project presented
a solution for the problem of heavy traffic in Visakhapatnam port trust.

5.2 FUTURE SCOPE

Provision of an extension to the existing berth to increase the speed of
import-export of containers. It will not only reduce the traffic congestion, but will
also welcome more vessels. This extension will also improve the cargo-handling
capacity of the already existing berth

71
 REFERENCES

1. Business Plan VPT (Visakhapatnam Port Trust) - Rotterdam Plan Project in

collaboration with Tata Consultancy Services 2007
2. ACRPS-Visakhapatnam, India – Arab Centre for Research and Policy
Studies.
3. Dr.P.Gunasekaran , an experimental study on the design of container berth
‘Extension of Container Berth at Madras Port’ (1993)
4. http//:www.visakhapatnamportrust.com
5. http//:www.windfinder.com
6. IS:4651 part III- Code of practice for planning and design of ports and
harbours – loading
7. IS: 1893: 2002- Criteria for earthquake resistant design of structures.
8. IS 4651( Part 4) – Code of practice for planning and design of ports and
harbours – part IV – general design considerations
9. IS 456 : 2000 - Plain and Reinforced Concrete - Code of Practice is an Indian
Standard code of practice for general structural use of plain and reinforced
concrete.
10. IRC: 6-2000 – Standard specifications and code of practice for roads bridges
(Section-II: Loads and stresses).
11. SP: 16-1980 - Design Aids for Reinforced Concrete to IS: 456-1978 has
Tables and charts that help structural engineers to rapidly design simple
sections.
12.IRC:21-2000 – Standard specifications and code of practice for roads bridges
13. http//:en.wikipedia.org//wiki/Bollard
14. http//:marineinsightsblog.trelleborg.com/index.php/tag/Fender
.

71
71
REFERENCES
1. ACRPS-Visakhapatnam, India – Arab Centre for Research and Policy
Studies.
2. Business Plan VPT (Visakhapatnam Port Trust) - Rotterdam Plan Project in
collaboration with Tata Consultancy Services 2007
3. Dr.P.Gunasekaran , an experimental study on the design of container berth
‘Extension of Container Berth at Madras Port’ (1993)
4. IRC: 6-2000 – Standard specifications and code of practice for roads bridges
(Section-II: Loads and stresses).
5. IRC:21-2000 – Standard specifications and code of practice for roads bridges
6. IS:4651 part III- Code of practice for planning and design of ports and
harbours – loading
7. IS: 1893: 2002- Criteria for earthquake resistant design of structures.
8. IS 4651( Part 4) – Code of practice for planning and design of ports and
harbours – part IV – general design considerations
9. IS 456 : 2000 - Plain and Reinforced Concrete - Code of Practice is an Indian
Standard code of practice for general structural use of plain and reinforced
concrete.
10. SP: 16-1980 - Design Aids for Reinforced Concrete to IS: 456-1978 has
tables and charts that help structural engineers to rapidly design simple
sections.
11. http//:en.wikipedia.org//wiki/Bollard
12. http//:marineinsightsblog.trelleborg.com/index.php/tag/Fender
13. http//:www.visakhapatnamportrust.com
14. http//:www.windfinder.com.

66
66