Structural Design

PROJECT: G+3 WAREHOUSE BUILDING DESIGN
DESIGNED BY: HILINA SOLOMON

LICENCE NUMBER: PPSTE/4422
STRUCTURAL DESIGN REPORT
FEB/2023
G+3 WAREHOUSE BUILDING DESIGN
Contents
1 Introduction .............................................................................................................................. 3
1.1 Forces or actions considered ............................................................................................ 3
1.2 Material and section property........................................................................................... 3
1.3 Design Criteria and Building Codes................................................................................. 4
1.4 Finite element model ........................................................................................................ 5
1.5 Concrete Cover to Reinforcement: ................................................................................... 5
......................................................................................................................................................... 6
2 Loading..................................................................................................................................... 7
2.1 Load case .......................................................................................................................... 7
2.2 Ductility class ................................................................................................................... 8
3 Structural analysis .................................................................................................................... 9
3.1 Plan and elevation irregularity check ............................................................................... 9
3.2 Fundamental period of vibration T1................................................................................. 9
3.3 Calculation of Behavioral Factors .................................................................................. 10
3.4 Accidental Eccentricity .................................................................................................. 12
3.5 Static and dynamic base shear ........................................................................................ 13
3.6 Loading and load combination .................................................................................... 17
3.6.1 Load Patterns.............................................................................................................. 17
3.6.2 Load Case ................................................................................................................... 17
3.6.3 Design Load Combinations ...................................................................................... 18
3.6.4 Load Combinations ................................................................................................... 18
3.7 Modal response spectrum method of analysis................................................................ 20
3.7.1 Modal Load Participation Ratios ................................................................................ 22
3.7.2 Calculation of building mass ...................................................................................... 22
3.7.3 Maximum story drift ................................................................................................... 23
3.7.4 Story Force ................................................................................................................. 23
3.7.5 Inter story drift check ................................................................................................. 23
3.7.6 Second Order Analysis ............................................................................................... 25
4 Structural Design .................................................................................................................. 26
4.1 Slab Design ........................................................................................................................... 26
4.2 Beam Design & Column Design .................................................................................... 28
4.2.1 Beam Design............................................................................................................... 28
4.2.2 Column Design ........................................................................................................... 31
1
4.2.3 Flexural Reinforcement of Beam and Column Design .............................................. 32

4.3 Stair Design .................................................................................................................... 36
4.4 Foundation Design ................................................................................................................. 38
4.4.1 Serviceability limit state ............................................................................................. 38
4.4.2 Ultimate limit state ..................................................................................................... 39
List of Tables
Table 1: Material property .............................................................................................................. 4
Table 2: Frame Section ................................................................................................................... 4
Table 3: Shell section ...................................................................................................................... 4
Table 4 Permanent Loads................................................................................................................ 7
Table 5 Variable Loads ................................................................................................................... 8
Table 6: Modal participating mass ratio ....................................................................................... 21
Table 7: Modal Load Participation Ratios .................................................................................... 22
2
1 Introduction
The following report depicted here shows the structural analysis and design report of Ware house
building. The structure consists of 4 stories including, Ground and roof floor. Each Floors serve
different function ranging from shops and Ware house areas.
The calculation to follow shows final modeling analysis and design. The following design report
is based on the new and revised code of ES EN 2015.
The structure is designed under the reliability class 2 according to ES EN 1990:2015. The
general data and preliminary overview are: a 50-years design working life (structural class S4),
“normal” supervision during execution, “normal” inspection and maintenance during use.
1.1 Forces or actions considered

• Permanent actions: Dead load (such as self-weight, partition load and finishing materials as per
ES EN 1991:1-1:2015)
• Variable actions: Live load, wind load and temperature load (as per ES EN 1991:1-1:2015, ES
EN 1991:1-4:2015 and ES EN 1992:1-1:2015)
• Lateral action: Earthquake (as per ES EN 1998-1:2015)
• Global imperfection: accidental eccentricity due to construction and loading mishaps (as per ES
EN 1991-1-1:2015)
1.2 Material and section property
The building is designed such that deterioration over its design working life does not impair the
performance of the structure below the intended life, having due regard to its environment and
anticipated level of maintenance. Environmental influences are therefore considered for
assessing the durability of concrete structures.
As per the structural drawing the following material properties are gathered:
• C20/25 for all horizontal or lateral structural members and foundation;
• C25/30 for all vertical or axial structural members and foundation
• Reinforcement grade S-400 (Grade – 60) of class B for bar diameter ≤ 12𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚;
• Reinforcement grade S-500 (Grade – 60) of class B for bar diameter ≥ 12𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚;
• Overall exposure class of XC1 and XC2
3
Table 1: Material property
Table 2: Frame Section
Table 3: Shell section
Note: The reduction in stiffness is to account cracking during earthquake, which later forms
plastic hinge (ES EN 1998-1:2004 Art. 4.3.1(7)).
1.3 Design Criteria and Building Codes

Serviceability limit state design method was used for member sizing and ultimate limit
state design for flexural designing.
The project is designed in accordance w i t h the new Ethiopian code, EBCS EN: 2015
-EBCS EN: 1990-2015: Basis of Structural Design

-EBCS EN: 1991-2015: Action on Structures
-EBCS EN: 1992-2015: Design of Concrete St r uctur es
-EBCS EN: 1997-2015: Geotechnical Design
-EBCS EN: 1998-2015: Design of Structures for Earthquake Resistance
4
1.4 Finite element model

Figure 1-1 shows the three-dimensional model of the structure. Ultimate and serviceability limit
state designs are carried to review the structures sustainability for both short and long-term
occupancies.
The method of analysis is reduced stiffness linear dynamic analysis. Where, the inelastic
deformation due to earthquake is accounted by behavior factor. Analysis and check are carried
out for the following structural members;
• Foundation
• Reinforced concrete beam, column, slabs
• Reinforced staircase
• Reinforced structural wall
1.5 Concrete Cover to Reinforcement:
Concrete cover of is the distance between the surfaces the reinforcement closest
to the concrete surface
• For Footings =50mm.

• For Beams, Columns cover to main reinforcement= 30mm
• For suspended slabs =20mm.
• For suspended stair =25mm.
• For slabs on hard-core =30mm.
5
Figure 1:- G+3 WAREHOUSE BUILDING DESIGN 3D MODEL
6
2 Loading
2.1 Load case

Dead – Self-weight of the structural members;
Live (Category A and D) – imposed variable action as per table 6.1 and 6.3 of ES EN
1991:11:2015, Categorized under category A (roof areas), category D (shopping areas).
Super dead – the dead weight of floor finish and all other permanent actions excluding self-
weight;
Spec-X and Spec-Y – dynamic lateral loads entertaining accidental torsional effects in the two
orthogonal directions (Art. 4.3.3.3 of ES EN 1998-1:2015);
EQXi and EQYi – static lateral loads entertaining accidental torsional effects in the two
orthogonal directions (Art. 4.3.3.2 of ES EN 1998-1:2015);
Gravity Loads
A. Permanent Loads
Table 4 Permanent Loads
According to Art, 6.3.1.2 of ES EN 1991-1-1:2002, for movable partitions with self-weight

>2.0≤3.0 KN/m wall length the uniformly distributed load of self-weight of the partitions is 1.2
KN/m2. Take into account of future expansion, a uniformly distributed partition load of 1.5
KN/m2 is considered.
7
B. Variable Loads
Table 5 Variable Loads
C. Seismic load
The calculation presented and compared are automatically generated lateral seismic loads for
load patterns EQXL, EQXR, EQYL, EQYR, Spec-X and Spec-Y. According to ES EN 1998-1,
as calculated by (CSi ETABS V.19.1.0)
2.2 Ductility class

It is considered low seismic case when the product of bed rock acceleration and soil factor
(ag*S) is less than 0.98 m/s2, according to Art. 3.2 .1 (4) of ES EN 1998-1:2015. However, for
this structure the product is 0.1 m/s2 and hence it is classified as a medium seismic area.
According to Art, 5.3.1 of ES EN 1998-1:2015, structures classified under low seismic case are
to be designed according to ES EN 1992-1-1:2015, but this structure is not classified under low
seismic case, hence requiring a minimum class of Medium Ductility.
8
3 Structural analysis
3.1 Plan and elevation irregularity check

In general, the regularity in plan can be checked when the structural model is defined. The
criteria for regularity in plan are described in EBCS EN 1998-2015
The slenderness of the building shall be not higher than 4 (λ=Lmax/Lmin),

But due to the building is regular shaped the plan
 Therefore the building is regular in plan.
In multi-story buildings, only approximate definitions of the center of stiffness and of the
torsional radius are possible. A simplified definition, for the classification of structural regularity
in plan and for the approximate analysis of torsional effects, is possible if the following two
conditions are satisfied:
• All lateral load resisting systems, such as cores, structural walls, or frames, run without
interruption from the foundations to the top of the building;
• The deflected shapes of the individual systems under horizontal loads are not very different.
This condition may be considered satisfied in the case of frame systems and wall system. In
general, this condition is not satisfied in dual system.
 Therefore the building is regular in elevation y direction.
3.2 Fundamental period of vibration T1
T1 = Ct xH3/4
Ct = 0.075 (Frame system); Tc = 0.6s (subsoil Class C)

T1 = 0.075 x 14.43/4 = 0.55s
T1≤ {2xTc=2*0.6 =1.2
{0.2s
Fb = Sd (T1) x m x λ
Where: λ= 0.85 since T1 < 2TC;
9
3.3 Calculation of Behavioral Factors
q= qo kw≥ 1.5
Where
qo is the basic value of the behavior factor, dependent on the type of the structural system
and on its regularity in elevation
Kw is the factor reflecting the prevailing failure mode in structural systems with walls
10
Therefore for this project since the building is wall equivalent dual system and regular in
and regular in elevation structure, the behavioral factor taken is = 3.90
11
3.4 Accidental Eccentricity
In order to account for uncertainties in the location of masses and in the spatial variation of
seismic motion, the calculated center of mass at each floor i shall be considered as being
displaced from its nominal location in each direction by an additional eccentricity:
eai = ±0.05 x Li
The following four load cases are thus considered.
 EQXR – corresponds to EQ force in the X-direction and 5% eccentricity to the left
 EQXL – corresponds to EQ force in the X-direction and 5% eccentricity to the right
 EQYR – corresponds to EQ force in the Y-direction and 5% eccentricity to the left
 EQYL – corresponds to EQ force in the Y-direction and 5% eccentricity to the right
12
3.5 Static and dynamic base shear
13
14
15
16
3.6 Loading and load combination

3.6.1 Load Patterns
Is Auto Self Weight

Name Type Auto Load
Load Multiplier
~LLRF Yes Other 0
Dead No Dead 1
EUROCODE8
EQXL No Seismic 0
2004
EUROCODE8
EQXR No Seismic 0
2004
EUROCODE8
EQYL No Seismic 0
2004
EUROCODE8
EQYR No Seismic 0
2004
FINISHING No Super Dead 0

Live A No Live 0
Live D No Live 0
WALL No Super Dead 0
3.6.2 Load Case
Name Type
Modal Modal - Eigen

Dead Linear Static
Live Linear Static
Live D Linear Static
EQXR Linear Static
EQXL Linear Static
EQYR Linear Static
EQYL Linear Static
FINISHING Linear Static
WALL Linear Static
Response
SPEC X
Spectrum
Response
SPEC Y
Spectrum
17
3.6.3 Design Load Combinations

The values of actions which occur simultaneously a r e combined as follows:
1. Quasi permanent
∑Gkj + PK + ∑ᴪ2i x Qki
2. Persistent and transient situation

COM B1 -1.35 x Gk+ 1.5 x Qk
Seismic Situation
General Format: ∑Gkj + AEd + ∑ᴪ2i x Qki ± Imperfection X
: ∑Gkj + AEd + ∑ᴪ2i x Qki ± Imperfection Y
Equivalent Static Method of Analysis

Thus are total load combinations f o r seismic situation corresponding to the four load
combinations a b o v e whose seismic actions, AEd have each two alternative lines of
actions to take in to account the effects of accidental torsional eccentricity.
1.0x∑Gkj + 0.3∑Qki +0.6∑Qki ± AEd, x ± 0.3AEd, y ± IMP X

OR
1.0x∑Gkj + 0.3∑Qki +0.6∑Qki ± AEd, y ± 0.3AEd, x ± IMP Y
3.6.4 Load Combinations
Name Type Is Auto Load Name SF Notes

COMB1 Linear Add No Dead 1.35
COMB1 FINISHING 1.35
COMB1 WALL 1.35
COMB1 Live 1.5
COMB1 Live D 1.5
COMB2 Linear Add No SESMIC GRAVITY 1
COMB2 EQXR 1
COMB2 EQYR 0.3
COMB2-1 Linear Add No SESMIC GRAVITY 1
COMB2-1 EQXR 1
COMB2-1 EQYR -0.3
COMB2-2 EQXR -1
COMB2-2 EQYR 0.3
COMB2-3 EQXR -1
COMB2-3 EQYR -0.3
COMB3 EQXL 1
18

COMB3 EQYL 0.3
COMB3-1 EQXL 1
COMB3-1 EQYL -0.3
COMB3-2 EQXL -1
COMB3-2 EQYL 0.3
COMB3-3 EQXL -1
COMB3-3 EQYL -0.3
COMB4 EQXR 0.3
COMB4 EQYR 1
COMB4-1 EQXR 0.3
COMB4-1 EQYR -1
COMB4-2 EQXR -0.3
COMB4-2 EQYR 1
COMB4-3 EQXR -0.3
COMB4-3 EQYR -1
COMB5 EQYL 1
COMB5 EQXL 0.3
COMB5-1 EQYL 1
COMB5-1 EQXL -0.3
COMB5-2 EQYL -1
COMB5-2 EQXL 0.3
COMB5-3 EQYL -1
COMB5-3 EQXL -0.3
SERVICE Linear Add No Dead 1
SERVICE FINISHING 1
SERVICE WALL 1
SERVICE Live 1
SERVICE Live D 1
SESMIC GRAVITY Linear Add No Dead 1
SESMIC GRAVITY FINISHING 1
SESMIC GRAVITY WALL 1
SESMIC GRAVITY Live 0.3
SESMIC GRAVITY Live D 0.6
SPECX Linear Add No SESMIC GRAVITY 1
SPECX SPEC X 1
SPECX SPEC Y 0.3
SPECX-2 Linear Add No SESMIC GRAVITY 1
SPECX-2 SPEC X 1
SPECX-2 SPEC Y -0.3
SPECX-3 SPEC X -1
SPECX-3 SPEC Y 0.3
19

SPECX-4 SPEC X -1
SPECX-4 SPEC Y -0.3
SPECY Linear Add No SESMIC GRAVITY 1
SPECY SPEC Y 1
SPECY SPEC X 0.3
SPECY-2 Linear Add No SESMIC GRAVITY 1
SPECY-2 SPEC Y 1
SPECY-2 SPEC X -0.3
SPECY-3 SPEC Y -1
SPECY-3 SPEC X 0.3
SPECY-4 SPEC Y -1
SPECY-4 SPEC X -0.3
3.7 Modal response spectrum method of analysis

Response spectra are curves plotted between maximum response of SDOF system subjected to
specified earthquake ground motion and its time period (or frequency). Multi degree of freedom
(MDOF) systems are usually analyzed using Modal Analysis. This system when subjected to
ground motion undergoes deformations in number of possible ways. These deformed shapes are
known as modes of vibration or mode shapes. Each shape is vibrating with a particular natural
frequency. Total unique modes for each MDOF system are equal to the possible degree of
freedom of system.
The commonly used methods for obtaining the peak response quantity of interest for a MDOF
system
are as follows:
• Absolute Sum (ABSSUM) Method,
• Square root of sum of squares (SRSS) method, and
• Complete quadratic combination (CQC) method
For the modal combination method, the CQC method of obtaining the peak response is applied
whereas, for the directional combination method the SRSS method is employed.
20
According to ES EN 1998-1:2015 art. 4.3.3.3.1 (3) - The response of all modes of vibration
contributing significantly to the global response is considered when the sum of the effective
modal masses for the modes amounts to at least 90% of the total mass of the structure.
Table 6: Modal participating mass ratio
As shown from table 4, the sum of the effective modal masses for the modes amounts to at least
90% of the total mass of the structure. Hence, the provided number of modes is adequate.
21
3.7.1 Modal Load Participation Ratios
A table -7 show, the 30 modes accounted mobilize more than 90% mass participation and
hence is more than enough for the lateral modes.
Table 7: Modal Load Participation Ratios
3.7.2 Calculation of building mass
The total mass is to be calculated by the software. The mass sources are the self-
weight, dead and Loads transferred from the slabs and fraction of live loads.
22
3.7.3 Maximum story drift
EQXR DIRECTION EQYR DIRECTION
3.7.4 Story Force
EQXR DIRECTION EQYR DIRECTION
3.7.5 Inter story drift check
For buildings having non-structural elements fixed in away so as not to interfere with
structural deformations, or without non-structural elements.
drv≤ 0.010h
23
where:
dr= is the design Inter story drift.
h =is the storey height;
v =is the reduction factor which takes in to account the lower return period of the seismic
action associated with the damage limitation requirement.
NOTE the values to be ascribed to ν for use are found in the National Annex. Different
values of ν may be defined for the various seismic zones, depending on the seismic hazard
conditions and on the protection of property objective. The recommended values of ν are 0.4
for importance classes III and IV and ν = 0.5 for importance classes I and II.
24
3.7.6 Second Order Analysis
Second order effects (P- fects) need not be considered if the inter-storey drift sensitivity
coefficient θ fulfills the following condition in all storeys according to ES EN 1998:2015:
θ= Ptot * dr 0.10
Vtot X h
If 0.1 < θ ≤ 0.2, the second-order effects may approximately be considered by multiplying the
relevant seismic action effects by a factor equal to 1 / (1 - θ) or by carrying out P-Delta analysis.
The value of the coefficient θ shall not exceed 0.3 as it indicates unstable building.
25
4 Structural Design
4.1 Slab Design
Analysis and design of the slab system has been done in accordance with EBCS EN
1992-2015. All floors of building including roofs are a solid concrete slab. Panels with
similar spans and loading conditions were grouped together as shown on the Slab
design section of the structural calculations. The moments, shears and reactions of the
panels were calculated using coefficients appropriate for the dimensions and
support conditions of t h e slabs using Excel based Spreadsheet. Finally we detail
our slab by using the maximum s p a n so that it is workable and avoid wastage.
26
27
4.2 Beam Design & Column Design
4.2.1 Beam Design
The force envelope i.e. maximum positive and negative moments, and maximum shear
(Envelope) is automatically selected by the ETABS software. The following section entails the
check for design of beams. The general procedure to be adopted is as follows:
• Check the cover and concrete quality comply with durability requirements.
• Calculate bending moments and shear forces.
• Calculate reinforcement required for bending and shear.
• Check the crack width and deflection comply with the allowable limits.
The effective span of a beam continuous over its supports should normally be taken as the
distance between the centers of the supports.
4.2.1.1 Ultimate limit state

A. Design for flexure
This section is concerned with the design for the ultimate limit state of sections subject to pure
flexure.
B. Design for shear
The shear force may be determined at distance d from the support. The first check according to
Art, 6.2.2 of ES EN 1992 is the verification VED ≤ VRdc assuming a section without shear
reinforcement. If this inequality does not hold, shear reinforcement is required. As the ductility
class is medium in addition to static shear force, shear force is calculated from the shear that
develops when plastic hinges develop in the critical regions at each end of the beam. This
equates to the sum of the negative yield moment capacity at the other, divided by the clear span.
4.2.1.2 Serviceability limit state

A. Long term deflection
Deflection control is dealt with in ES EN 1992 in chapter [7.4]. [7.4.2] deals with the control of
deflection using simple „deemed to satisfy‟ rules, and [7.4.3] deals with the calculation of
deflections. It was the view of the drafting committee that, in general, the calculation of
deflections gave an unwarranted impression of precision in what was a very uncertain process. It
28
was felt that the use of simple rules, such as limits to span/effective depth ratios, was a perfectly
adequate approach for all normal situations.
B. Control of cracking
Control of crack can be achieved simply by providing minimum reinforcement and adequate
spacing of reinforcement as discussed earlier.
29
30
4.2.2 Column Design
The general procedure followed is:

• Check the slenderness of the column.
• Check that cover and concrete comply with requirements for durability.
• Calculate axial loads and moments.
• Design section and reinforcement
4.2.2.1 Ultimate limit state
A. Design for flexure

There is an additional restriction in columns; the normalized axial compression force ʋd must be
less than 0.65. This is intended to limit the adverse effects of cover spalling and avoid the
situation, characteristics of member‟s subject to high levels of axial stress, where only limited
ductility is available. The regions adjacent to both end sections of all primary seismic columns
31
shall have special detailing. This special detailing includes increased calculated confinement and
avoiding reinforcement lapping.
The beam to column joint is also calculated from capacity design principles to meet the strong
column/weak beam requirement. That is the sum of the column strengths provided at the face of
the joint should be 30% more of the sum of the beam strengths provided at the face of the joint.
B. Shear and confinement reinforcement

This is calculated from the mechanical volumetric ratio of confinement reinforcement, ꞶWd.
4.2.3 Flexural Reinforcement of Beam and Column Design
Elevation View- A Axis
32
33
34
35
4.3 Stair Design
The stair was modeled as one way slabs running in longitudinal direction. And the design was
conducted for each design actions, bending moment and shear force according to design
considerations provided in EBCS:EN 1992, 2015.
Analysis and design of the stair case system has been done using excel sheet.
36
37
4.4 Foundation Design

The foundation was dimensioned in such a way that the assumed bearing capacity of the soil is
not exceeded. The allowable bearing capacity of the soil was designed to be 330kpa for the
Isolated Foundation and this has to be verified by the engineer before construction.
ES EN 1997-1:2015 is intended to be used as a general basis for the geotechnical aspects of the
design of buildings and civil engineering works.
According to Art, 2.1 (10) of ES EN 1997 – To establish geotechnical design requirements, three
Geotechnical Categories, 1, 2 and 3, may be introduced.
Analyses should use stress-strain relationships for ground and structural materials and stress
states in the ground that are sufficiently representative, for the limit state considered, to give a
safe result. In geotechnical design, the following should be considered for inclusion as actions:
• The weight of soil, rock and water;
• stresses in the ground;
• Dead and imposed loads from structures;
The foundation is designed to resist the full dead load and live load delivered by the column.
Additionally, the foundation is being required to resist wind or earthquake effects in combination
with the dead and live loads.
.
4.4.1 Serviceability limit state
A. Bearing capacity
Allowable bearing capacity is the maximum pressure that can be applied to the soil from the
foundation so that the two requirements are satisfied:
• Acceptable safety factor against shear failure below the foundation;
• Acceptable total and differential settlement
Ultimate bearing capacity is the minimum pressure that would cause the shear failure of the
supporting soil immediately below and adjacent to the foundation.
I. Based on finite element analysis
Finite element analysis is more realistic to predict the contact stress at each finite element. The
maximum contact stress observed in all regions will be decided by the soil investigation.
38
4.4.2 Ultimate limit state
A. Flexural reinforcement
The flexural reinforcement is calculated by taking into account the worst possible load
combination, that includes gravity and lateral loads.
 The type of foundation provided for this building is spread Foundation the ultimate and
Service design load combination is shown on the excel sheet.
39
40
F1
41
42
F2
43
44
F3
45
46

Structural Design

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Structural Design

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Structural Design

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

PROJECT: G+3 WAREHOUSE BUILDING DESIGN

DESIGNED BY: HILINA SOLOMON

STRUCTURAL DESIGN REPORT

4.2.3 Flexural Reinforcement of Beam and Column Design .............................................. 32

1.1 Forces or actions considered

1.2 Material and section property

Table 1: Material property

Table 2: Frame Section

Table 3: Shell section

1.3 Design Criteria and Building Codes

-EBCS EN: 1990-2015: Basis of Structural Design

1.4 Finite element model

1.5 Concrete Cover to Reinforcement:

• For Footings =50mm.

Figure 1:- G+3 WAREHOUSE BUILDING DESIGN 3D MODEL

2.1 Load case

Table 4 Permanent Loads

According to Art, 6.3.1.2 of ES EN 1991-1-1:2002, for movable partitions with self-weight

Table 5 Variable Loads

2.2 Ductility class

3.1 Plan and elevation irregularity check

The slenderness of the building shall be not higher than 4 (λ=Lmax/Lmin),

 Therefore the building is regular in plan.

 Therefore the building is regular in elevation y direction.

3.2 Fundamental period of vibration T1

3.3 Calculation of Behavioral Factors

3.4 Accidental Eccentricity

3.5 Static and dynamic base shear

3.6 Loading and load combination

Is Auto Self Weight

FINISHING No Super Dead 0

3.6.2 Load Case

Modal Modal - Eigen

3.6.3 Design Load Combinations

2. Persistent and transient situation

Equivalent Static Method of Analysis

1.0x∑Gkj + 0.3∑Qki +0.6∑Qki ± AEd, x ± 0.3AEd, y ± IMP X

3.6.4 Load Combinations

Name Type Is Auto Load Name SF Notes

Name Type Is Auto Load Name SF Notes

Name Type Is Auto Load Name SF Notes

3.7 Modal response spectrum method of analysis

Table 6: Modal participating mass ratio

3.7.1 Modal Load Participation Ratios

Table 7: Modal Load Participation Ratios

3.7.2 Calculation of building mass

3.7.3 Maximum story drift

EQXR DIRECTION EQYR DIRECTION

3.7.4 Story Force

EQXR DIRECTION EQYR DIRECTION

3.7.5 Inter story drift check

3.7.6 Second Order Analysis

4.1 Slab Design

4.2 Beam Design & Column Design

4.2.1 Beam Design

4.2.1.1 Ultimate limit state

4.2.1.2 Serviceability limit state

4.2.2 Column Design

The general procedure followed is: