REVISEDD

P a g e |i
BAGUIO CENTRAL UNIVERSITY – UNDERGRAD STUDIES
sSTUDIES
STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS AND DESIGN OF A PROPOSED FOUR-STOREY
SCHOOL BUILDING AT VIRAC INTEGRATED SCHOOL,
ITOGON BENGUET
A CE Project Research
Presented to the Faculty of the College of Engineering
BAGUIO CENTRAL UNIVERSITY
Baguio City
In Partial Fulfillment
of the Requirements for the Degree of
Bachelor of Science in Civil Engineering
By:
JINELYN W. BALLOG
RODERICK L. BELAGAN
IGNACIO Y. MARTIN
JUDE D. PAYADKEO
LENNY S. SAGAYO
S.Y.
2023-2024
P a g e |ii
APPROVAL SHEET
sSTUDIES
This thesis entitled, ”STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS AND DESIGN OF A FOUR-
STOREY SCHOOL BUILDING AT VIRAC INTEGRATED SCHOOL, ITOGON,
BENGUET” prepared and submitted by JINELYN W. BALLOG, RODERICK L.
BELAGAN, IGNACIO Y. MARTIN, JUDE D. PAYADKEO, LENNY S. SAGAYO in
partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of BACHELOR OF SCIENCE
IN CIVIL ENGINEERING (CE Project- Research 1 and 2), has been examined and
is hereby recommended for acceptance and approval for the final oral defense.
ENGR. ONOFRE F. RILLERA, MSCE

Adviser
Acceptance and approved by the CE PROJET RESEARCH COMMITTEE

with the grade of _____________ on ________________.

Chairman
ENGR.CRISELDA S. FELIX, PhD ENGR.CHARLIE M. FELIX, MPA

Member Member
NOTED:
Dean, College of Engineering
Date:_________________________
P a g e |iii
ABSTRACT
sSTUDIES
Name of Institution : BAGUIO CENTRAL UNIVERSITY
Address : #18 Bonifacio Street Baguio City
Title : “STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS AND DESIGNOF A
PROPOSED FOUR-STOREY SCHOOL BUILDING AT
VIRAC INTEGRATED SCHOOL IN ITOGON BENGUET”
Researchers :JINELYN W. BALLOG
RODERICK L. BELAGAN
IGNACIO Y. MARTIN
JUDE D. PAYADKEO
LENNY S. SAGAYO
Adviser : ENGR. ONOFRE F. RILLERA, MSCE
This research presents a comprehensive structural analysis of a proposed
four-storey school building located at Virac Integrated School in Itogon, Benguet.
The aim of the study is to assess the structural integrity, stability, and safety of
the building design, ensuring its resilience against various loads and
environmental conditions. The analysis incorporates modern engineering
principles, considering factors such as seismic activity prevalent in the region.
The methodology involves a detailed examination of architectural and structural
drawings, material properties, and construction techniques. Finite Element
Analysis (FEA) software is employed to simulate and evaluate the structural
behavior under different loading scenarios, including seismic events. The study
P a g e |iv
also considers relevant building codes and standards to ensure compliance and
sSTUDIES
adherence to safety regulations. Key findings highlight the structural efficiency
of the proposed design, identifying potential areas for optimization or
reinforcement. The seismic performance of the building is a focal point, given the
geographical context. Recommendations for design improvements or
modifications are provided to enhance the overall structural robustness. This
research contributes valuable insights to the field of structural engineering,
particularly in the context of educational infrastructure. The outcomes of this
study not only ensure the safety of the Virac Integrated School building but also
serve as a reference for future projects in seismic-prone regions.
Keywords: Building, Design, Preliminary, Slab, Seismic, Beam, Column, Footing,
School, NSCP, Dep-Ed, Classroom, and Design Detailing.

P a g e |v
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
sSTUDIES
Foremost, praises and thanks to God Almighty for unending love, strength,
protection, inspiration, and blessings throughout our project research to be
successful.
The researchers would like to thank the president of the institution we are
in, Madam Margarita Cecilda B. Rillera, MBA for the vision, sincerity, and
motivation for the university that has deeply inspired us and for providing
necessary facilities to help the students to conduct project research.
The researchers are extremely grateful to our instructors of the College of
Engineering headed by Engr. Onofre F. Rillera, MSCE with whom we took the
courses that help us establish the foundation to pursue this research.
The researchers highly appreciate the invaluable assistance of their
adviser, Engr. Onofre F. Riller, MSCE for his unending support.
To the panel of Examiners: chaired by Engr. Onofre F. Rillera and Engr.
Criselda S. Felix. The researchers truly salute their expertise to surmount what
seems to be an uphill task.
We extend our sincere appreciation to the staff and students of Virac
Integrated School at Itogon Benguet for their cooperation and support, which
played a pivotal role in the successful completion of this research

P a g e |vi
We extend our heartfelt gratitude to the BCU Librarian for their invaluable
sSTUDIES
assistance and unwavering support, which greatly enriched our research
experience at Baguio Central University library.
J.W.B.
R.L.B.
I.Y.M
J.D.P.
L.S.S.
P a g e |vii
DEDICATION
sSTUDIES
This study is wholeheartedly dedicated to my beloved family, in every chapter of my life, you
have been the unwavering support, the guiding light, and the source of endless love. Your
belief in me has fueled my dreams, your wisdom has shaped my path, and your presence has
filled my days with joy. This dedication is a testament to the profound impact you have had
on my journey. With heartfelt gratitude, I dedicate my achievements and successes to each
one of you. You are my greatest blessing, my rock, and my forever home. With all my
love,
Chinilin
To my beloved parents, who have been my source of inspiration and gave
me strength when I thought of giving up, who provide their moral, spiritual,
emotional, and financial support.
To my brothers, sisters, relatives, mentor, friends, and classmates who
shared their words of advice and encouragement to finish this study.
And lastly, we dedicated this book to the almighty God. Thank you for the
guidance strength, power of mind, protection and skils and for giving us a
healthy life. All of these, we offer to you.
RODERICK L. BELAGAN
I dedicated this to the glory of God, in accordance with the wisdom imparted in
Colossians 3:23-24 (NIV): "Whatever you do, work at it with all your heart, as
working for the Lord, not for human masters, since you know that you will receive
an inheritance from the Lord as a reward. It is the Lord Christ you are serving."
And to my family especially to my parents, whose unwavering love and support have
inspired me to pursue excellence in all that I do.
ARJIE M.
P a g e |viii
sSTUDIES
To my family, whose unwavering love, encouragement, and sacrifices have been the
foundation of my journey. Your endless support and understanding have sustained
me through the challenges and triumphs of academic pursuit. With deepest gratitude,
I offer this work as a tribute to your unwavering belief in me and as a testament to
the strength of our bond. Thank you for being my source of inspiration and strength.
JUDE D. PAYADKEO
To my dearest parents,
Your unwavering love, guidance, and sacrifices have been the cornerstone of my
life's journey. Through your endless support and encouragement, you have
instilled in me the values of hard work, determination, and perseverance. This
research book is a tribute to your boundless devotion and the countless
sacrifices you have made to nurture my dreams and aspirations. Your belief in
me has been a constant source of strength and inspiration, guiding me through
every challenge and triumph. With heartfelt gratitude, I dedicate this work
to you, as a token of my deepest love and appreciation.
LENY S. SAGAYO
P a g e |ix
TABLE OF CONTENTS
sSTUDIES
TITLE PAGE i
APPROVAL SHEET ii
ABSTRACT iii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT v
DEDICATION vii
CHAPTER 1 18
BACKGROUND OF THE STUDY 18
19
Objectives of the study
Conceptual and Theoretical Framework 20

Paradigm of the Study 21
Statement of the problem 22
Assumptions/Research Hypothesis 23
Significance of the Study 23
Review of Related Literature 23
CHAPTER 2 26
RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODOLOGY 26
Research Design 26
Locale and population of the study 27
Scope and delimitation 27
Data gathering tools 28
Data gathering procedure 28
Treatment of data 30
Ethical considerations 30
CHAPTER 3 32
PRESENTATION, ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION OF DATA 32
Dead Loads ( Section 204, 2015) 32
Live Load (Section 205, NSCP 2015) 32
P a g e |x
Design Materials (Section 209, NSCP 2015) 33
sSTUDIES
Seismic Analysis 33
Structural Analysis and Design of the School building 33
Soil Bearing Capacity 34
CHAPTER 4 35
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 35
Conclusions 35
Recommendations 36
CURRICULUM VITAE 2024

P a g e |xi
LIST OF FIGURES
sSTUDIES
Figure no. Title Pages
1 Paradigm of the Study 22
2 Flow Diagram 29
3 Vicinity Map 39
4 Lot Plan 40
5 Slab 2 at roofdeck 112
6 Slab 1 at Fourth Floor 119
7 Slab 2 (Hallway at fourthfloor) 126
8 Slab Detailing and Schedule 132
9 T- Beam Geometry 138
10 Typical Beam Details 166
11 Beam Section 166
12 Schedule of reinforced Concrete beam 167
13 Section 3-3 (c2) 171
14 Column Elevation 185
15 Footing 1 Design details 193
16 Footing 2 Design details 198

P a g e |xii
LIST OF TABLES
sSTUDIES
Table no. Title Pages
1 Beam sizes at Roof deck Longitudinal section 66
2 Beam sizes at Roof deck Transverse section 66
3 Beam sizes at 4th to1st Floor Longitudinal 66
4 Beam sizes at 4th to 1st Floor transverse 66
5 Summary of Column dimensions 74
6 Distribution of Base shear 80
7 Horizontal Distribution Forces 83
8 Column Schedule 186

P a g e |xiii
Appendices
sSTUDIES
VICINITY MAP 39
LOT PLAN 40
Appendix A 41
ARCHITECTURAL PLAN 41
Perpective 41
Ground floor plan 41
Second floor plan 42
Third/Fourth floor plan 42
Roofdeck floor plan 43
Front elevation 43
Rear elevation 44
Right side elevation 45
Left side elevation 46
Appendix B 47
PRELIMNARY SIZING 48
Design Data 48
NSCP 2015 minimum design 49
A.SLAB 50
@ROOF DECK 50
@4th Floor, 3rd Floor & 2nd Floor Classroom and Urinals 51
@Hallway 52
P a g e |xiv
B.BEAM (B) 52
sSTUDIES
FOR ROOF DECK 53
FOR 4TH , 3RD, 2ND & GROUND FLOOR BEAM 58
SUMMARY 66
C.COLUMN 67
4rth Floor Column 68
3rd Floor Column 69
2ND Floor Column 70
Ground Floor Column 71
SUMMARY 74
Appendix C 75
SEISMIC ANALYSIS 75
Computation of dead Loads 75
BASE SHEAR: 79
DISTRIBUTION OF BASE SHEAR OVER THE HEIGHT OF THE
STRUCTURE 80
HORIZONTAL DISTRIBUTION SHEAR 80
Center of Mass 82
Horizontal Distribution Forces 83
Appendix D 88
EARTHQUAKE (PORTAL METHOD) 88
COLUMN SHEARS 88
P a g e |xv
COLUMN MOMENTS 90
sSTUDIES
GIRDER SHEARS 91
SHEAR & MOMENT 93
Roof deck 93
4TH, 3RD, & 2ND FLOOR 95
Shear diagram 98
Moment Diagram 101
Appendix E 105
SLAB DESIGN 105
Design Requirements: 105
Slab Loads: 105
Roof deck slab 106
Calculations 106
Analysis of short span for slab 1 107
Analysis of long span for slab 1 109
Slab 2 112
Calculations 113
Fourth Floor to second floor slab 119
Calculations 120

P a g e |xvi
Slab 2(Hallway) 126
sSTUDIES
Calculations 126
Appendix G 132
BEAM DESIGN 133
ROOF DECK BEAM 134
Longitudinal Beam Section 135
Transverse Beam Section 142
4TH, 3RD , 2nd & GROUND FLOOR LEVEL 150
Longitudinal Beam Section 151
TRANSVERSE BEAM 158
Appendix H 168
COLUMN DESIGN 168
4TH FLOOR COLUMN 169
3RD & 2ND FLOOR COLUMN 173
GROUND FLOOR COLUMN & COLUMN FOOTING 177
C3 (Grid A- Hallway)- 3rd to Ground Floor level 180
COLUMN ELEVATION 185
COLUMN SCHEDULE 186

P a g e |xvii
Appendix I 187
sSTUDIES
FOOTING DESIGN 187
Footing I: 189
Design Detail 193
Footing II: 194
Design Detail 198
Appendix J 199
ESTIMATIONS 199
P a g e |18
sSTUDIES Chapter 1
THE PROBLEM
Background of the study
Educational infrastructure is a cornerstone of societal development, and
its structural integrity is paramount to ensuring a safe and conducive learning
environment (Janssen Teixeira, 2017). The proposed construction of a four-
storey school building at Virac Integrated School in Itogon, Benguet, signifies a
commitment to educational advancement in the region. As urbanization and
population growth continue, the demand for robust and seismically resilient
structures becomes increasingly vital, especially in regions prone to seismic
activity like Benguet.
PHIVOLCS-DOST stated that Benguet, located within a seismically active
zone, necessitates a meticulous structural analysis and design approach to
safeguard the proposed school building against potential seismic events. The
choice of construction materials, adherence to building codes, and engineering
design considerations are critical factors that must be carefully examined to
ensure the longevity and safety of the structure.
This research aims to contextualize the structural analysis within the
broader narrative of educational expansion, underscoring the necessity for
sustainable solutions to classroom insufficiency. Through this lens, the Virac
Integrated School's proposed four-storey building becomes not just a physical

P a g e |19
extension but a symbol of resilience, progress, and an unwavering dedication to
sSTUDIES
providing quality education in the face of spatial constraints.
The outcomes of this research not only contribute to the safety and
durability of the Virac Integrated School building but also serve as a valuable
reference for future construction projects in seismic-prone areas. The findings
will be instrumental in informing engineering practices and standards, fostering
the creation of educational facilities that withstand the test of time and natural
forces, ensuring a secure environment for generations to come.
Objectives of the study
This study aims to address classroom insufficiency at Virac Integrated School
through objectives focused on evaluating the proposed four-storey school
building's design, seismic resilience, materials, and overall structural
optimization.
1. To conduct a thorough review of the proposed four-storey school building's
architectural plans, focusing on the design elements that directly address
and alleviate the existing classroom shortage.
2. To align the structural analysis with the overarching goal of enhancing the
educational experience, emphasizing the importance of not just expanding
infrastructure but doing so with a commitment to quality, safety, and the
well-being of the student community.

P a g e |20
3. To provide recommendations for optimizing the design, ensuring that the
sSTUDIES
proposed four-storey structure not only fulfills the immediate need for
classrooms but also establishes a foundation for long-term educational
growth and resilience.
4. To contribute insights and best practices for addressing classroom
insufficiency, fostering a broader discourse on sustainable solutions to
spatial constraints in educational institutions.
Conceptual and Theoretical Framework
The proposed four-storey school building serves as a focal point in the
framework. Structural elements, such as design, materials, and construction
practices, are integral components influencing the effectiveness and resilience of
the infrastructure. At the core of the framework is the concept of educational
infrastructure, encompassing physical facilities that support the learning
environment. This includes classrooms, buildings, and other structures that
form the backdrop of educational activities.
Given the seismic landscape of Benguet, seismic resilience is a critical
concept. It underscores the building's ability to withstand seismic forces,
ensuring the safety of students, teachers, and staff during potential earthquakes.
Systems theory is applied to conceptualize the subject as a complex
system, emphasizing the interconnectedness of its various elements. Drawing

P a g e |21
from multiple theoretical perspectives, the framework aims to enrich the study
sSTUDIES
by incorporating diverse viewpoints and approaches.
By employing this combined conceptual and theoretical framework, the
research aims to provide a robust and comprehensive analysis of the subject
under investigation, considering both specific elements and broader theoretical
perspectives.
Paradigm of the Study
The paradigm outlines the relationship of the variables namely: Input,
Process and Output as illustrated in Figure 1.
The Input is the Structural Analysis of a Proposed Four-Storey School
Building at Virac Integrated School Itogon, Benguet.
The Process includes the methodology and processes to be used in this
study namely: the descriptive research design, data gathering, treatment of data,
and design analysis.
The Output is the structural design of the four-storey high school building.
P a g e |22
Figure 1: Paradigm of the Study
sSTUDIES
Statement of the problem
The main aim of this study is to propose a four-story elementary school
building for the pupil of barangay Virac, Itogon, Benguet in which it will
specifically seek to answer the following questions.
1. What is the minimum and maximum number of students allowed per
classroom?
2. How many classrooms are needed to remove the tent classroom?
3. What is the minimum lot area for the proposed school building?
4. What is the minimum number of classrooms of the proposed four-storey
school building?
5. What material should be used for the proposed four-storey school
building?
Assumptions/Research Hypothesis
The following are the assumptions/research hypothesis of the study:
1. Class sizes shall range from a minimum of 15 pupils/students to a
maximum of 65 pupils/students per class.
2. Tent classrooms are used for grade 2, grade 3a and grade 3b, for a total
of 3 tents classroom.
3. The given Lot area for the proposed four-storey building is 380 squares
meters.
P a g e |23
4. The researchers estimated a total of 12 classrooms in which every floor
sSTUDIES
consist of 3 classrooms.
5. Materials used in building such as cement, reinforced bars, sand, and
aggregates should be based on the NSCP code and on Dep-ed standards
and specification.
Significance of the Study
The proposed construction of a four-storey school building at Virac
Integrated enhances Virac Integrated School by addressing classroom
insufficiency, ensuring structural safety, and providing sustainable solutions for
an improved learning environment.
This research benefits Virac Integrated School students by creating more
classrooms, ensuring a safer learning environment, and contributing to a
sustainable and enhanced educational experience.
This research supports Virac Integrated School teachers by providing
better classroom facilities, ensuring a safe teaching environment, and
contributing to an improved overall educational experience.
This research at Virac Integrated School benefits students' parents by
ensuring a safer and more conducive learning environment for their children.
Review of Related Literature
The ideas, completed hypothesis, assumptions or conclusions, techniques,
and other items are contained in this chapter. It also covers structural and
P a g e |24
architectural theories, environmental management, and safety management.
sSTUDIES
The information that was presented in this chapter supports in familiarizing
readers with relevant details related to the current study.
Diaz-Vicario (2017), Schools should be safe spaces for students, teaching
staff and non-teaching staff. For the concept of ‘safety’ to be so meaningful, it
must be interpreted broadly to encompass well-being in its widest sense. A
common challenge for schools and educational authorities is, therefore, to
manage school safety appropriately not only to prevent physical accidents and
incidents, but also with the purpose of creating an environment that promotes
physical, emotional, and social well-being, both individually and collectively.
National Research Council (2007), A growing understanding of how our
learning environments affect people suggests that a school building is an
important tool for learning and teaching, and, like any tool, can enhance or
hinder the process. School facility factors such as building age and condition,
quality of maintenance, lighting, color, noise, temperature, and air quality can
affect student health, safety, sense of self, and psychological state.
Uline, Tschannen-Moran, & Wolsey (2008), Research has also shown that
the quality of facilities influences citizen perceptions of schools and can serve as
a point of community pride and increased support for public education.
Wolfe & Rivlin (1987), The physical environment is one of the important
components of an institutional system, such as schools. Physical changes in
school architecture have always been influenced by the social, political,

P a g e |25
economic, and educational ideologies of the times. these changes shaped
sSTUDIES
society’s conceptions of children’s development and attitudes toward the
educational practices, as well as the types of educational facilities.
Lawson Reed Wulsin Jr. (2013), Classrooms should be profound places of
revelation and discovery. Well-designed space can elevate discourse, encourage
creativity, and promote collaboration. Connecting indoor learning space to the
natural world through daylight, views, and finishes has proven to improve
student performance. Though technology and contemporary design serve an
important role in connecting learners to the fast-paced modern world,
preservation of historic spaces contributes to an otherwise, unachievable
gravitas and majesty.
Norman M. Stineman (American Architect), a standard classroom has 736
square feet area and accommodates 45 pupils. The average weight of furniture
and inmates is about 7,500 pounds, or 10 pounds per square foot. He estimates
the maximum possible load as 2 adults in each seat and 30 around walls, giving
total live load of 28 pound per square foot.

P a g e |26
Chapter 2
sSTUDIES
RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODOLOGY
This chapter presents the research design, locale and population of the
study, data gathering instruments, data gathering procedures, data gathering
analysis, treatment of data and ethical consideration.
Research Design
The study’s research design outlines the basic approach to ensure that the
evidence obtained enables the researchers to effectively address the research
problem as unambiguously as possible (Kirshenblatt, B., 2006). The design
allows the researchers to meet their suitable research method for the subject
matter and set up their studies for success. (2022).
The researchers used a Descriptive research design to generate findings
that are practically useful in reaching conclusions or decision-making. It also
provides a way to verify and quantify the findings of exploratory studies relating
to the proposed structural design of the four-story elementary building. In
addition, the exploratory research design will be used to explore the specific
aspects of the research area as well as provide the final and conclusive answers
to the research questions.
The researcher used Quantitative data to study clinical conditions and
outcomes which will be used in surveying the lot area, the bearing capacity of
the soil, as well as the possible number of classrooms and facilities that are
P a g e |27
needed for the structuration of the building. The Qualitative research study is
sSTUDIES
also needed to narrate the findings of the survey such as the transcript of an
unstructured, in-depth interview as well as organize, summarize, and interprets
these non-numerical observations (Marja, V. PHD and Ann, C. PHD)
Scope and delimitation
The research aims to provide a focused and impactful contribution to
addressing the specific challenges related to the proposed four-storey school
building at Virac Integrated School.
The researchers would like to limit this study to structural analysis of a
four-storey school building only, choosing the right materials for the building
structure, and management of construction. It is only limited in design of slabs,
beams, columns, foundations, wall partitions of the proposed building.
The study does not cover electrical and plumbing systems. Those parts are
scheduled to their own expertise professionals.
Locale and population of the study
The proposed study was conducted at Virac Integrated School in Itogon
Benguet. Which is 501.59 km (311.67 miles) away from baguio according to
( www.distancefromto.net).This school comprises kindergarten to grade 8.

P a g e |28
Data gathering tools
sSTUDIES
The researchers used mixed-method research for conducting a research
such as survey, participant observation, and conducting some interviews
recorder and camera to gather some pictures and statements/information from
the selected staff of Virac Elementary school about the design data’s that are
needed in the design process.
Data gathering procedure
The researchers sought permission from the Dean of the College of
Engineering of Baguio Central University to obtain necessary documents from
Virac Integrated school. The documents were obtained from the principal’s Office
of the said school after the Dean signed the letter and the approval of sir
Ferdinand Carantes, the school Principal.

P a g e |29
sSTUDIES
The flow diagram below shows the step-by step process starting from site
investigation until the cost estimate of the proposed project.
School Approval
• Request letter
Data collection
Quantitative survey
• Classroom insufficiency
• Documents and Records
o Lot Area
o Soil bearing capacity
o NSCP limitations
o Dep-Ed standard
design.
Structural Design
and Analysis
Cost Estimate
Figure 2: Flow Diagram

P a g e |30
Treatment of data
sSTUDIES
The researchers used manual computation for the structural design of the
four-storey school building considering all the limitations of the National
Structural Code of the Philippines (NSCP 2015).
The building’s load requirements were determined, including factors used
in the computation for loads due to earthquake from the National Structural
Code of the Philippines (NSCP 2015).
The soil bearing capacity that could support all loads of the structure that
goes to the foundation was based on the bid documents of DPWH for Itogon
Project.
Ethical considerations
In conducting this study, the researchers assured to follow the
guidelines/procedures to ensure the practice of ethical consideration during the
conduct of the research.
While COVID19 is still present, the researchers take precautions. To
safeguard their safety while gathering data, the researchers used safety
precautions including facemasks and the proper social distance. All of the
researchers must receive their required vaccinations. While conducting the
study, the researchers keep a number of ethical considerations in mind.
The researchers’ hand-deliver letters to the person in responsibility of
collecting the necessary data. Participants' personal information remain

P a g e |31
confidential, as will the organizations. The tight enforcement and promise of non-
sSTUDIES
disclosure of personal information, identification, and names in this study. This
safeguards their privacy and makes them feel secure. Each piece of information
will be meticulously tabulated and recorded by the researcher. We'll gather and
use data. This is done to ensure the validity and integrity of the research
findings. All received information remain confidential and used only for the
investigation. The researchers give the appropriate authority figure a succinct
and detailed explanation of the study.

P a g e |32
Chapter 3
sSTUDIES
PRESENTATION, ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION OF DATA
This chapter analyzes and evaluates the data taken from Virac, Itogon,
Benguet and all other necessary information needed for the design and analysis
of the proposed five storey commercial parking building.
Dead Loads ( Section 204, 2015)
• Ceiling (13mm gypsum board)…………………………..…..0.104kPa
• Floor finish (25mm cement on stone concrete)…………..1.53kPa
Partitions
• Exterior wall (6” CHB, plastered both faces)…...…2.74kPa
• Interiod wall (4” CHB, plastered both faces)………2.11kPa
• Construction loads (electrical, plumbing, etc..)…….…….1.50kPa
Live Load (Section 205, NSCP 2015)
• Classroom live load…………………………………..………….1.90kPa
• Corridor above ground floor live load……………..…………3.83kPa
• Corridor on ground floor live load…………………………….4.8kPa
• Urinals live load…………………………………………..………2.0kPa
• Stair-case loading…………………………………………......…4.0kPa
• Roof Deck Live Load(same as accupancy)..……………...…1.90kPa

P a g e |33
Design Materials (Section 209, NSCP 2015)
sSTUDIES
• F ’c (concrete compressive strength)……………….…………20.7MPa
• fy (steel bars yield strength )………………………..……415MPa (Grade 60)
• Modulus of Elasticity for DEPconcrete, = 200000.00 MPa
• Unit Weight of conc = 56 kN/m3
• Compressive Block deep = 0.85
• Capacity Reduction factor = 0.90
Seismic Analysis
The seismic analysis was performed using static force procedures and the
NSCP 2015 regulations and for the detailed Seismic and Earthquake analysis
please refer to the following data:
• Appendix 3: Seismic Analysis
• Appendix 4: Earthquake Analysis
Structural Analysis and Design of the School building
The dimensions of the cross section were assumed first in order to estimate
the structure’s dead weight. NSCP specifies the weight values of materials.
Deadloads includes self-weights of columns, beams, slabs etc. The researchers
calculated the columns, beams and slabs self-weight manually and the use of
Microsoft Excel. The structural designed details of columns, beams, slabs and
foundations were designed manually.

P a g e |34
For detailed Structural analysis please refer to the following data:
sSTUDIES
• Appendix B: Preliminary Sizing
• Appendix F: Slab Design
• Appendix G: Beam Design
• Appendix H: Columns design
• Appendix I: Foundation design
Soil Bearing Capacity
The ultimate soil bearing capacity was based on the bid documents of
DPWH for Itogon Project. The soil bearing capacity is at 4093.55 psf (196.0 KPa)
which ise used in the foundation design load under consideration be with seismic
loads.
P a g e |35
Chapter 4
sSTUDIES
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
The conclusions and recommendations derived from the study’s findings
are presented in this chapter.
Conclusions
1. The proposed school building has Classroom area of 72 square meters

with a capacity to accommodate 50-70 students and considering the
current student for the present school year which stands at 40-45
students, it is evident that the available space significantly surpasses
the current student population. Consequently, the perceived problem
of insufficient classroom capacity is effectively addressed and resolved.
2. The proposed school building, equipped with a total of 12 classrooms,
provides a sufficient and permanent solution to eliminate the need for
temporary tent classrooms currently in use. The ample classroom
space in the new building ensures a more stable and conducive learning
environment, eliminating the reliance on temporary structures.
3. In terms of spatial requirements, the proposed school building is
designed to fit within a maximum lot area of 10.5 meters by 36 meters.
This designated area ensures optimal utilization of space while
accommodating the structural needs of the building.
4. With a comprehensive design comprising a total of 12 classrooms
distributed across all four floors, the proposed building demonstrates
a capacity that adequately supports the maximum total of classes

P a g e |36
required. The number of classrooms aligns harmoniously with the
sSTUDIES
educational needs, ensuring that the facility is well-equipped to
accommodate the entire range of classes envisaged.
5. The materials incorporated in the proposed building adhere to the
standards set by the Department of Education (DepEd) and the
limitations outlined in the National Structural Code of the Philippines
(NSCP,2015). This stringent adherence to safety regulations and
material specifications ensures the construction's reliability, safety,
and compliance with established guidelines.
Recommendations
The following are suggestions based on the findings.
1. To conduct a thorough review of the proposed four-storey school building's

architectural plans, focusing on the design elements that directly address
and alleviate the existing classroom shortage.
2. To align the structural analysis with the overarching goal of enhancing the
educational experience, emphasizing the importance of not just expanding
infrastructure but doing so with a commitment to quality, safety, and the
well-being of the student community.
3. To provide recommendations for optimizing the design, ensuring that the
proposed four-storey structure not only fulfills the immediate need for
classrooms but also establishes a foundation for long-term educational
growth and resilience.
P a g e |37
4. To contribute insights and best practices for addressing classroom
sSTUDIES
insufficiency, fostering a broader discourse on sustainable solutions to
spatial constraints in educational institutions.
5. The researchers suggest this paper to the students who will undertake the
same study to serve as reference and to further improve or expand the
scope of this project study.

P a g e |38
REFERENCES
sSTUDIES
NSCP 2015
Prestressed concrete notes from Engr. Onofre F. Rillera and Engr.

Joselito Buhangin
Simplified Construction Estimate by Max B. Fajardo jr.
Earthquake book compiled by Sir John Patnaan
(Diaz-Vicario & Sallan, 2017; Hundeloh & Hess, 2003).

Understanding parents’ perceptions of school safety can be an
important issue that will guide teachers
Lawson Reed Wulsin Jr. (2013), the influence of Learning Spaces

on the teaching quality
Wolfe, D. A. (1987). Child abuse: Implications for child

development and psychopathology. Sage Publications, Inc.
Uline, Tschannen-Moran, & Wolsey (2008), Improving the

Physical and Social Environment of School: A Question of Equity
National Research Council (2007) Nutrient Requirements of Small

Ruminants: Sheep, Goats, Cervids, and New World Camelids. The
National Academies Press, Washington DC
GOVEPH (13-23-22), DepEd to exhibit medium to high-rise school

building designs for highly urbanized, congested areas.
Department of science and technology, Philippine institute of

volcanology and seismology (PHIVOLCS)
P a g e |39
VICINITY MAP
sSTUDIES
Figure 3: Vicinity Map

P a g e |40
LOT PLAN
sSTUDIES
Figure 4: Lot Plan

P a g e |41
Appendix A
sSTUDIES
ARCHITECTURAL PLAN
Perspective
Ground floor plan
`
P a g e |42
Second floor plan
sSTUDIES
Third/Fourth floor plan

P a g e |43
Roofdeck floor plan
sSTUDIES
Front elevation
P a g e |44
Rear elevation
sSTUDIES
P a g e |45
Right side elevation
sSTUDIES
P a g e |46
Left side elevation
sSTUDIES
P a g e |47
Framing plan
sSTUDIES
P a g e |48
Appendix B
sSTUDIES
PRELIMINARY SIZING
X1Design Data
Dead Loads ( Section 204, 2015)

• Ceiling (13mm gypsum board)…………………………..…..0.104kPa
• Floor finish (25mm cement on stone concrete)…………..1.53kPa
• Partitions
• Exterior wall (6” CHB, plastered both faces)…...…2.74kPa
• Interiod wall (4” CHB, plastered both faces)………2.11kPa

• Construction loads (electrical, plumbing, etc..)…….…….1.50kPa
Live Load (Section 205, NSCP 2015)
• Classroom live load…………………………………..………….1.90kPa
• Corridor above ground floor live load……………..…………3.83kPa
• Corridor on ground floor live load…………………………….4.8kPa
• Urinals live load…………………………………………..………2.0kPa
• Stair-case loading…………………………………………......…4.0kPa
• Roof Deck Live Load (same as accupancy)..……………...…1.90kPa
Design Materials (Section 209, NSCP 2015)

• F ’c (concrete compressive strength) ……………….…………20.7MPa
• fy (steel bars yield strength) ………………………..……415MPa (Grade 60)
• Modulus of Elasticity for concrete, = 200000.00 MPa
• Unit Weight of conc = 56 kN/m3
• Compressive Block deep = 0.85
• Capacity Reduction factor = 0.90
P a g e |49
NSCP 2015 minimum design
sSTUDIES
Table 2014 table 205
Figure 5:Minimum Design of NSCP 2015

P a g e |50
A. SLAB
sSTUDIES
By General thumb Rule:

Slab without drop panel = 125mm
Slab with drop panel = 100mm
By NSCP 2010:
𝑓𝑦
𝐿𝑛(0.80 +1400)
t=
36 + 9𝛽
𝐿
> 2.0……………one-way slab
𝑆
𝐿
𝑆
< 2.0…………..two-way slab
Wt. of slab = 23.56 kN/m3 (0.125m) = 3kPa

For classroom, urinals and staircase:
𝐿 4500
= = 1.125 < 2 two-way slab system
𝑠 4000
@ROOF DECK
Figure 6: Roofdeck Slab
Assumption of column = 300mm x 300mm

Long span = 4500mm
Short span = 4000mm
𝑓𝑦 415
𝐿𝑛(0.80 +1400) 4100(0.80 +1400) 4500−300
t= = ;𝛽 = = 1.14
36 + 9𝛽 36 + 9(1.14) 4000−300
= 97.18mm say 125mm
adopt 125mm slab thickness
P a g e |51
@4th Floor, 3rd Floor & 2nd Floor Classroom and Urinals
sSTUDIES
Figure 7: 4th floor to 2nd floor considered slab

Long span = 4500mm
Short span = 4000mm
𝑓𝑦 415
𝐿𝑛(0.80 +1400) 4050(0.80 +1400) 4500−400
t= = ;𝛽 = = 1.14
36 + 9𝛽 36 + 9(1.14) 4000−400
= 96mm say 125mm
@Ground Floor Classroom and Urinals
Assumption of column = 500mm x

500mm
Long span = 4500mm
Short span = 4000mm
𝑓𝑦 415
𝐿𝑛(0.80 +1400) 3900(0.80 +1400)
t= =
36 + 9𝛽 36 + 9(1.14)
4500−500
;𝛽 = = 1.14
4000−500
= 92.44mm say 125mm
P a g e |52
@Hallway
sSTUDIES

Long span = 4500mm
Short span = 2500mm
𝑓𝑦 415
𝐿𝑛(0.80 +1400) 4200(0.80 +1400)
t= =
36 + 9𝛽 36 + 9(1.91)
4500−300
;𝛽 = = 1.91
2500−300
= 86.58mm say 125mm
B. BEAM (B)
*NSCP Coefficients for Shear and Moment Diagram (Section 406, NSCP 2015)
P a g e |53
⚫ Short Span
sSTUDIES 𝑊𝐿𝑠
Ws =
3
⚫ Long Span
𝐿𝑠 2
𝑊𝐿𝑠 3−(𝐿𝐿)
WL = ( )
3 2
0.85(𝑓′𝑐)𝛽(600)
ρ𝑏 = 𝑓𝑦(𝑓𝑦 + 600)
0.85(20.7)(0.85)(600)
ρ𝑏 = = 0.0213
415(415 + 600)
ρ𝑚𝑎𝑥 = 0.75ρ𝑏 = 0.75(0.0213) = 0.0160
0.85(𝑓′𝑐)𝛽(0.003) 0.85(𝑓′𝑐)(0.85)(0.003)
ρ= = = 0.0135
𝑓𝑦(0.008) 415(0.008)
ρ= 0.0135 < ρ𝑚𝑎𝑥 = 0.0160
fy
ω = ρf′c = 0.0135(
415
20.7
)= 0.2707
DEAD LOADS
Ceiling (13mm gypsum board) 0.104kPa
Floor finish 1.53kPa
Plumbing, electrical 1.50kPa
Weight of slab (0.125m x 23.56kN/𝑚3 ) 3kPa
TOTAL = 6.13kPa
FOR ROOF DECK
DL = 6.13kPa
LL = 1.90kPa + 1.0kPa (Factor of safety) = 2.90kPa
Parapet Walls
⚫ 150mm Concrete Hallow Blocks (CHB), 1.5 m High, fully grouted and
plastered on both faces using 16.5 KN/m³ density of unit.
= (2.63 + 2(0.24)) (1.5) = 4.67 kN/m
⚫ Weight of beam (Assumed) = 0.25 x 0.50 x 23.56 = 3kN/m
6.13(4.5)
𝑊𝐷𝐿 = (
3
) = 9.20kN/m
P a g e |54
2.90(4.5)
𝑊𝐿𝐿 = (
sSTUDIES ) = 4.35kN/m
3
Total load:
DL = 4.67 + 3 + 9.20 = 16.87kN/m
LL = 4.35kN/m s
Factored load:
𝑊𝑢 = 1.2DL + 1.6LL = 1.2(16.87) + 1.6(4.35)
𝑊𝑢 = 27.20kN/m
LONGITUDINAL BEAM SECTION
AT GRID 4, 3, 2 & 1
Long Span, La = 4.5m
Short Span, Lb = 4m
Span A-B & H-I
Midspan:
1 1
𝑀𝑢 = 𝑊𝑢 𝐿2 = (27.20kN/m)(4.5)2
14 14
𝑀𝑢 = 39.34kN-m
Left Support:
1 1
𝑀𝑢 = -16 𝑊𝑢 𝐿2 = - (27.20kN/m)(4.5)2
16
𝑀𝑢 = -34.43kN-m
P a g e |55
Right Support:
sSTUDIES
1 1
𝑀𝑢 = -10 𝑊𝑢 𝐿2 = -10(27.20kN/m)(4.5)2
𝑀𝑢 = -55.08kN-m
Span B-C, C-D, D-E, E-F, F-G & G-H
Left & Right Support:
1 1
𝑀𝑢 = -11 𝑊𝑢 𝐿2 = -11(27.20kN/m)(4.5)2
𝑀𝑢 = -50.07kN-m
Midspan:
1 1
𝑀𝑢 = 𝑊𝑢 𝐿2 = 16(27.20kN/m)(4.5)2
16
𝑀𝑢 = 34.43kN-m
𝑀𝑢 = Øb𝑑 2 f’cω(1-0.59ω)
𝑀𝑢
2 = f’cω(1-0.59ω)
Øb𝑑
𝑀𝑢
= (20.7)(0.2707)((1-0.59(0.2707))
Øb𝑑2
55.08 x 106
b𝑑 =
2
0.90𝑏(20.7)(0.2707)(1−0.59(0.2707))
53.14 x 106 (1000)2𝑚𝑚2

𝑑 = √(0.90)𝑏(20700)(0.2707)(1−0.59(0.2707)) x
𝑚2
P a g e |56
Assume values for “b”
sSTUDIES
Assume “b” d (mm) H = d + 50
250mm 228.01mm H = 278.01mm say
500mm
300mm 208.15mm H = 258.15mm
350mm 192.72mm H = 242.72mm
ADOPT: 250mm x 500mm

TRANSVERSE SECTION
@ GRID A, B, C, D, E, F, G, H & I (Span of 4m)
Weight of beam (Assumed) = 3kN/m
6.13(4)
𝑊𝐷𝐿 = (
3
) = 8.17kN/m
2.90(4)
𝑊𝐿𝐿 = ( ) = 3.87kN/m
3
Total load:
DL = 4.67 + 3 + 8.17 = 15.84kN/m
LL = 3.87kN/m
Factored load:
𝑊𝑢 = 1.2DL + 1.6LL = 1.2(15.84) + 1.6(3.87) = 25.2kN/m
Midspan:
1 1
𝑀𝑢 = 14 𝑊𝑢 𝐿2 = 14(25.2kN/m)(4)2
𝑀𝑢 = 28.8kN-m
P a g e |57
Left Support:
sSTUDIES
1 1
𝑀𝑢 = -16 𝑊𝑢 𝐿2 = -16(25.2kN/m)(4)2
𝑀𝑢 = -25.2kN-m
Right Support:
1 1
𝑀𝑢 = -10 𝑊𝑢 𝐿2 = -10(25.2kN/m)(4)2
𝑀𝑢 = -40.32kN-m
40.32 x 106 (1000)2𝑚𝑚2

𝑑 = √(0.90)𝑏(20700)(0.2707)(1−0.59(0.2707)) x
𝑚2

250mm 195.09mm H = 244.09mm say
500mm
300mm 178.09mm H = 228.09mm
350mm 164.88mm H = 214.88mm
ASSUME: 250mm x 500mm

P a g e |58
FOR 4TH , 3RD, 2ND & GROUND FLOOR BEAM
sSTUDIES
LONGITUDINAL SECTION
AT GRID 4, 3 & 2
Span of 4.5m
Live Load:
Classroom = 1.92kPa
Corridor above ground = 3.83kPa
Stair-case = 4.0kPa
Urinals = 2.0kPa
=11.75 + 1.0(factor of safety)
Live Load = 12.75kPa or 13kPa
Dead Load:
Slab
Floor finish (25mm cement on stone concrete) = 1.53kPa
Ceiling (13mm gypsum board) = 0.008 x 13 = 0.104kPa
Plumbing, electrical =1.50kPa
Weight of slab (0.125m x 23.56kN/𝑚3 ) = 3kPa
= 6.13kPa
Wall
Exterior wall (6”or150mm CHB,plastered both faces)
= 2.74kPa x 3.4m
= 9.32kN/m
Interior wall (4” CHB, plastered both faces)
= 2.11kPa x 3.4m
= 7.17kN/m
Dead Load = 22.62kPa
Weight of beam (Assumed) = 0.300 x 0.600 x 23.56kN/𝑚3 = 4.24kN/m
22.62(4.5)
𝑊𝐷𝐿 = ( ) = 33.93kN/m
3
13(4.5)
𝑊𝐿𝐿 = ( ) = 19.5kN/m
3
P a g e |59
Total load:
sSTUDIES
DL = 4.24 + 33.93 = 38.17kN/m
LL = 19.5kN/m
Factored load:
𝑊𝑢 = 1.2DL + 1.6LL = 1.2(38.17) + 1.6(19.5)
𝑊𝑢 = 77kN/m
Span A-B & H-I
Left Support:
1 1
𝑀𝑢 = -16 𝑊𝑢 𝐿2 = -16(77kN/m)(4.5)2
𝑀𝑢 = 97.45kN-m
Midspan:
1 1
𝑀𝑢 = 14 𝑊𝑢 𝐿2 = 14(77kN/m)(4.5)2
𝑀𝑢 = 111.38kN-m
Right Support:
1 1
𝑀𝑢 = -10 𝑊𝑢 𝐿2 = -10(77kN/m)(4.5)2
𝑀𝑢 = 155.93kN-m
P a g e |60
sSTUDIES
1 1
𝑀𝑢 = -11 𝑊𝑢 𝐿2 = -11(77kN/m)(4.5)2
𝑀𝑢 = -141.75kN-m
Midspan:
1 1
𝑀𝑢 = 16 𝑊𝑢 𝐿2 = 16(77kN/m)(4.5)2
𝑀𝑢 = 97.45kN-m
𝑀𝑢
b𝑑 2 =
0.90𝑏(20.7)(0.2707)(1−0.59(0.2707))
155.93 x 106 (1000)2𝑚𝑚2

𝑑 = √(0.90)𝑏(20700)(0.2707)(1−0.59(0.2707)) x
𝑚2

250mm 383.65mm H = 433.65mm
350mm 324.24mm H = 374.24mm
AT GRID 1
Span of 4.5m
Live Load:
Corridor on ground floor live load = 4.8kPa
= 8.63 + 1.0(factor of safety)
Live Load = 9.63kPa
P a g e |61
Dead Load:
sSTUDIES
Slab
Weight of slab (0.125m x 23.56kN/𝑚3 ) = 3kPa
= 6.13kPa
Dead Load = 6.13kPa
Weight of beam (Assumed) = 0.250 x 0.500 x 23.56kN/𝑚3 = 3kN/m
6.13(4.5)
𝑊𝐷𝐿 = (
3
) = 9.20kN/m
8.63(4.5)
𝑊𝐿𝐿 = ( ) = 12.95kN/m
3
Total load:
DL = 3 + 9.20 = 12.20kN/m
LL = 12.95kN/m
Factored load:
𝑊𝑢 = 1.2DL + 1.6LL = 1.2(12.20) + 1.6(12.95)
𝑊𝑢 = 35.36kN/m
Span A-B & H-I
Left Support:
1 1
𝑀𝑢 = - 𝑊𝑢 𝐿2 = -16(35.36kN/m)(4.5)2
16
𝑀𝑢 = 44.75kN-m
P a g e |62
Midspan:
sSTUDIES
1 1
𝑀𝑢 = 14 𝑊𝑢 𝐿2 = 14(35.36kN/m)(4.5)2
𝑀𝑢 = 51.15kN-m
Right Support:
1 1
𝑀𝑢 = -9 𝑊𝑢 𝐿2 = -9(35.36kN/m)(4.5)2
𝑀𝑢 = -79.56kN-m
1 1
𝑀𝑢 = - 𝑊𝑢 𝐿2 = - 11(35.36kN/m)(4.5)2
11
𝑀𝑢 = -65.09kN-m
Midspan:
1 1
𝑀𝑢 = 𝑊𝑢 𝐿2 = 16(35.36kN/m)(4.5)2
16
𝑀𝑢 = 44.75kN-m
79.56 x 106 (1000)2𝑚𝑚2

𝑑 = √(0.90)𝑏(20700)(0.2707)(1−0.59(0.2707)) x
𝑚2

250mm 274.04mm H = 324.04mm
300mm 250.16mm H = 300.16mm say 600
350mm 231.61mm H = 281.61mm

P a g e |63
TRANSVERSE SECTIONS
sSTUDIES
AT GRID A, B, D, F, H & I
Weight of beam (Assumed) = 0.30 x 0.60 x 23.56 = 4.24kN/m
22.62(4)
𝑊𝐷𝐿 = ( ) = 30.16kN/m
3
13(4)
𝑊𝐿𝐿 = ( ) = 17.33kN/m
3
Total load:
DL = 4.24 + 30.13 = 34.37kN/m
LL = 17.33kN/m
Factored load:
𝑊𝑢 = 1.2DL + 1.6LL = 1.2(34.37) + 1.6(17.33)
𝑊𝑢 = 68.97kN/m
Midspan:
1 1
𝑀𝑢 = 𝑊𝑢 𝐿2 = 14(68.97kN/m)(4)2
14
𝑀𝑢 = 78.82kN-m
Support:
1 1
𝑀𝑢 = - 𝑊𝑢 𝐿2 =- 10(68.97kN/m)(4)2
10
𝑀𝑢 = -110.35kN-m
110.35 x 106 (1000)2𝑚𝑚2

𝑑= √(0.90)𝑏(20700)(0.2707)((1−0.59(0.2707)) x 𝑚2
P a g e |64
sSTUDIES
250mm 322.74mm H = 372.74mm
300mm 294.62mm H = 344.62mm say
600mm
350mm 272.76mm H = 322.76mm
ASSUME: 300mm x 600mm
AT GRID C, E & G
DL = 22.62kPa
LL = 13kPa
Weight of beam (Assumed) = 0.350 x 0.650 x 23.56 = 5.36kN/m
22.62(4)
𝑊𝐷𝐿 = ( ) = 30.16kN/m
3
13(4)
𝑊𝐿𝐿 = ( ) = 17.33kN/m
3
Total load:
DL = 5.36 + 30.16 = 35.52kN/m
LL = 17.33kN/m s
𝑊𝑢 = 1.2DL + 1.6LL = 1.2(35.52) + 1.6(17.33)
𝑊𝑢 = 70.35kN/m
Midspan:
1 1
𝑀𝑢 = 14 𝑊𝑢 𝐿2 = 14(70.35kN/m)(4)2
𝑀𝑢 = 80.4kN-m
P a g e |65
Left Support:
sSTUDIES
1 1
𝑀𝑢 = -16 𝑊𝑢 𝐿2 = -16(70.35kN/m)(4)2
𝑀𝑢 = -70.35kN-m
Right Support:
1 1
𝑀𝑢 = - 𝑊𝑢 𝐿2 = -9(70.35kN/m)(4)2
9
𝑀𝑢 = -125.07kN-m
125.07 x 106 (1000)2𝑚𝑚2

𝑑 = √(0.90)𝑏(20700)(0.2707)(1−0.59(0.2707)) x
𝑚2

300mm 313.65mm H = 363.65mm say
600mm
350mm 290.39mm H = 340.39mm
400mm 271.56mm H = 321.56mm

P a g e |66
SUMMARY
sSTUDIES
AT ROOF DECK
Longitudinal Sections:
Grid Beam Mark Dimensions
4 B-2 250mm x 500mm
3 B-2 250mm x 500mm

2 B-2 250mm x 500mm
1 (hallway) B-2 250mm x 500mm
Table 1: Summary of Beam sizes at Roof deck Longitudinal section
Transverse sections:
GRID Beam Mark Dimensions
A, B, C, D, E, F, B-2 250mm x 500mm
G, H & I
Table 2:Summary of Beam sizes at Roof deck Transverse section
AT 4TH , 3RD, 2ND, & GROUND FLOOR BEAM

Longitudinal Sections:
Grid Beam Mark Dimensions
4 B-1 300mm x 600mm
3 B-1 300mm x 600mm

2 B-1 300mm x 600mm
1 (hallway) B-1 300mm x 600mm

Table 3:Summary of Beam sizes at 4th Floor to 1st Floor Longitudinal section
Transverse sections:
GRID Beam Mark Dimensions
A, B, C, D, E, F, B-1 300mm x 600mm
G, H & I
Table 4:Summary of Beam sizes at 4th Floor to 1st Floor transverse section
P a g e |67
C. COLUMN
sSTUDIES
Considering the widest area.
4.5000
4.0000
Tributary Area = 4.5 x 4 = 18𝑚2

(According to NSCP 2015, Section 207.5.12.1.3 greater than 65𝑚2 )
f’c = 20.7 MPa

fy = 415MPa (Grade 60)
Ag = Gross area
For square tied columns:
2𝑃𝑢
Ag = ; 𝛼 = 0.80
𝛼∅{0.85𝑓′𝑐(1−𝜌𝑔) + 𝜌𝑔𝑓𝑦}
∅ = 0.65
steel ratio, 𝜌𝑔 = 0.01 to 0.08
Assume: steel ratio, 𝜌𝑔 = 0.02
P a g e |68
4rth Floor Column
sSTUDIES
C3
DEAD LOAD:
Ceiling 0.104(18) =1.87kN
Plumbing, electrical 1.50(18) =27kN
Floor finish 1.53(18) = 27.54kN
Wt. of beam 23.56(4.5)(0.25 x 0.50) =13.25kN
23.56(4)(0.25 x 0.50) =11.78kN
Wt. of slab (23.56 x 0.125)(18) =53.01kN
Parapet wall (2.63 + 2(0.24))(1.5)(18) =83.97kN
DL = 218.42kN
LIVE LOAD:
LL = 2.90(18) = 52.2kN
Factored load:
𝑃𝑢4 = 1.2DL + 1.6LL = 1.2(218.62) + 1.6(52.2)
𝑃𝑢4 = 345.62kN
(𝑃𝑢)
Ag =
(𝛼)(∅){0.85𝑓′𝑐(1−𝜌𝑔) + 𝜌𝑔𝑓𝑦}
(345.62 x 103 )
Ag =
(0.80)(0.65){(0.85)(20.7)(1−0.02) + (0.02)(415)}
Ag = √26020.88𝑚𝑚2
b = 161.31mm
Say: 𝐶14 = 300mm
USE : 300mm x 300mm
P a g e |69
3rd Floor Column
sSTUDIES
For C2 (GRID 4, 3, & 2)
DEAD LOAD:
Ceiling 0.104(18) = 1.872kN
Plumbing, electrical 1.50(18) = 27kN
Wt. of Slab (23.56 x 0.125)(18) = 53.01kN
Wt. of interior wall 2.11(2.8)(4.5+4) = 50.22kN
Wt. of column
C1 23.56(2.8)(0.30 x 0.30) = 5.94kN
Wt. of beam: 23.56(4.5)(0.30 x 0.60) = 19.08kN
23.56(4)(0.30 x 0.60) = 16.96kN
DL = 201.62kN
LIVE LOAD:
Classroom , LL 1.92(18) = 34.56kN
Urinals live load 2.00(18) = 36kN
Stair-case loading 4.00(18) = 72kN
LL = 142.56kN
Factored load:
𝑃𝑢3 = 1.2DL + 1.6LL = 1.2(201.62) + 1.6(142.56) = 470.04kN
𝑃𝑢3 = 470.04kN + 𝑃𝑢4 = 345.62kN
𝑃𝑢3 = 815.66kN
(𝑃𝑢)
Ag =
(𝛼)(∅){0.85𝑓′𝑐(1−𝜌𝑔) + 𝜌𝑔𝑓𝑦}
(815.66 x 103 )
Ag =
(0.80)(0.65){(0.85)(20.7)(1−0.02) + (0.02)(415)}
Ag = √61409.03𝑚𝑚
b = 247.81mm
Say: 𝐶13 = 300mm
USE : 400mm x 400mm
P a g e |70
2ND Floor Column
sSTUDIES
For C1 (GRID 4, 3, & 2)
DEAD LOAD:
Ceiling 0.104(18) = 1.872kN
Wt. of Slab (23.56 x 0.125)(18) = 53.01kN
Wt. of column
C1 23.56(2.8)(0.40 x 0.40) = 10.55kN
Wt. of beam: 23.56(4.5)(0.30 x 0.60) = 19.08kN
23.56(4)(0.30 x 0.60) = 16.96kN
DL = 206.23kN
LIVE LOAD:
Classroom , LL 1.92(18) = 34.56kN
LL = 142.56kN
Factored load:
𝑃𝑢2 = 1.2DL + 1.6LL = 1.2(206.23) + 1.6(142.56) = 475.57kN
𝑃𝑢2 = 475.57kN + 𝑃𝑢3 = 815.66kN
𝑃𝑢2 = 1,291.23kN
(𝑃𝑢)
Ag =
(𝛼)(∅){0.85𝑓′𝑐(1−𝜌𝑔) + 𝜌𝑔𝑓𝑦}
(1,291.23x 103 )
Ag =
(0.80)(0.65){(0.85)(20.7)(1−0.02) + (0.02)(415)}
Ag = √97243.63𝑚𝑚
b = 311.84mm
Say: 𝐶13 = 400mm
USE : 400mm x 400mm
P a g e |71
Ground Floor Column
sSTUDIES
For C1 (GRID 4, 3, & 2)
DEAD LOAD:
Ceiling 0.104(18) = 1.872kN
Wt. of Slab (23.56 x 0.125)(18) = 53.01kN
Wt. of column
C1 23.56(2.8)(0.40 x 0.40) = 10.55kN
Wt. of beam: 23.56(4.5)(0.30 x 0.60) = 19.08kN
23.56(4)(0.30 x 0.60) = 16.96kN
DL = 206.23kN
LIVE LOAD:
Classroom , LL 1.92(18) = 34.56kN
LL = 142.56kN
Factored load:
𝑃𝑢1 = 1.2DL + 1.6LL = 1.2(206.23) + 1.6(142.56) = 475.57kN
𝑃𝑢1 = 475.57kN +𝑃𝑢2
𝑃𝑢1 = 1,766.8kN
(𝑃𝑢)
Ag =
(𝛼)(∅){0.85𝑓′𝑐(1−𝜌𝑔) + 𝜌𝑔𝑓𝑦}
(1766.8 x 103 )
Ag =
(0.80)(0.65){(0.85)(20.7)(1−0.02) + (0.02)(415)}
Ag = √133018.01𝑚𝑚
b = 364.72mm
Say: C1 = 500mm
USE : 500mm x 500mm
P a g e |72
HALLWAY
sSTUDIES
Figure 8:Tributary area of Hallway
Tributary Area = 4.5 x 1.25 = 5.63𝑚2
For rectangular tied columns:

2𝑃𝑢
Ag = ; 𝛼 = 0.80
𝛼∅{0.85𝑓′𝑐(1−𝜌𝑔) + 𝜌𝑔𝑓𝑦}
∅ = 0.65
Use: 𝜌𝑔 = 0.02
4rth Floor Column
C2 (GRID 1)
DEAD LOAD:
Ceiling 0.104(5.63) =0.586kN
Plumbing, electrical 1.50(5.63) =8.445kN
Floor finish 1.53(5.63) = 8.61kN
Wt. of beam 23.56(4.5)(0.25 x 0.50) =13.25kN
23.56(2.5)(0.25 x 0.50) = 7.36kN
Wt. of slab (23.56 x 0.125)(5.63) =16.58kN
DL = 54.83kN
LIVE LOAD:
LL = 2.90(5.63) = 16.33kN
P a g e |73
Factored load:
sSTUDIES
𝑃𝑢4 = 1.2DL + 1.6LL = 1.2(54.83) + 1.6(16.33)
𝑃𝑢4 = 91.92kN
(𝑃𝑢)
Ag =
(𝛼)(∅){0.85𝑓′𝑐(1−𝜌𝑔) + 𝜌𝑔𝑓𝑦}
(91.92 x 103 )
Ag =
(0.80)(0.65){(0.85)(20.7)(1−0.02) + (0.02)(415)}
Ag = √6920.43𝑚𝑚
b =83.19mm
Say: 𝐶14 = 300mm
USE : 300mm x 300mm
3rd, 2nd & Ground Floor
C2 (GRD 1)
DEAD LOAD:
Ceiling 0.104(5.63) =0.586kN
Plumbing, electrical 1.50(5.63) =8.445kN
Floor finish 1.53(5.63) = 8.61kN
Wt. of beam 23.56(4.5)(0.25 x 0.50) =13.25kN
23.56(2.5)(0.25 x 0.50) =7.36kN
Wall(h = 1m) 2.11(1)(4.5) = 9.50kN
Wt. of slab (23.56 x 0.125)(18) =53.01kN
DL = 100.76kN
LIVE LOAD:
Corridor above ground floor live load = 3.83kPa(5.63) = 21.56kN
Corridor on ground floor live load = 4.8kPa(5.63) = 27.02Kn
LL = 48.58kN
Factored load:
𝑃𝑢3,2,1 = 1.2DL + 1.6LL = 1.2(191.13) + 1.6(48.58)
𝑃𝑢3,2,1 = 198.64kN + 𝑃𝑢4
𝑃𝑢3,2,1 = 290.56kN
(𝑃𝑢)
Ag =
(𝛼)(∅){0.85𝑓′𝑐(1−𝜌𝑔) + 𝜌𝑔𝑓𝑦}
P a g e |74
(290.56x 103 )
Ag =
sSTUDIES
(0.80)(0.65){(0.85)(20.7)(1−0.02) + (0.02)(415)}
Ag = √21875.54𝑚𝑚2
b = 147.90mm
Say: 𝐶14 = 300mm
USE : 300mm x 300mm
SUMMARY
LEVEL MARK COLUMN

DIMENSION
4TH FLOOR 300mm x 300mm
C3
Hallway 300mm x 300mm
3RD FLOOR C2 400mm x 400mm
Hallway C3 300mm x 300mm
2ND FLOOR C2 400mm x 400mm
Hallway C3 300mm x 300mm
GROUND C1 500mm x 500mm
FLOOR C3 300mm x 300mm
Hallway
CF1 500mm x 500mm
COLUMN
FOOTING CF3 300mm x 300mm
Table 5: Summary of Column dimensions

P a g e |75
Appendix C
sSTUDIES
SEISMIC ANALYSIS
Computation of dead Loads
DEAD LOAD (Section 204, NSCP 2015)

Roof Deck
For slab = (Thickness of slab)(Area of the slab)(Unit weight of

concrete) slab = (0.125)(10.5 x 36)(23.56) = 1113.21 kN
• Parapet wall = (1.8x36)(2) + (1.8x10.5)(2) = 167.4 kN
• Stair wall = 3(3)(2) = 18 kN
BEAM (B) = (No. of beams) (Length of beam) (Area of beam) (Unit weight of
beam)
• Beam(longitudinal) = (32)(4.5)(0.25 x 0.50)(23.56) = 424.08kN
• Beam(transvers) = (18)(4)(0.25 x 0.50)(23.56) = 212.04kN
• Beam(transvers) = (9)(2.5)(0.25 x 0.50)(23.56) = 66.26kN
TOTAL = 2001 kN
FOURTH FLOOR LEVEL

COLUMN (C) = (No. of columns) (Height of column) (Area of column)
(Unit weight of concrete)
• C = (33)(2.9)(0.30 x 0.30)(23.56) = 202.92kN
beam)
LONGITUDINAL BEAM
• B-1 = (24)(4.5)(0.30 x 0.60)(23.56) = 458.01kN
• B-1 = (8)(4.5)(0.25 x 0.50)(23.56) = 106.02kN
TRANSVERSE BEAM
• G-1 = (18)(4)(0.30 x 0.60)(23.56) = 305.34kN
• G-2 = (9)(2.5)(0.30 x 0.60)(23.56) = 95.42kN
SLAB
(Thickness of slab) (Area of the slab) (Unit weight of concrete)
= {(0.125)(4.1x3.6)(23.56)x16} + {(0.125)(4.1x2.1)(23.56) x 8}
= 898.34kN
WALL
Transverse Wall
• (2)(8.975 x 0.150 x 2.88 x 23.56) = 182.69kN
• (4)(6.9 x 0.150 x 2.88 x 23.56) = 280.91kN
P a g e |76
• (2)(4 x 0.150 x 2.85 x 23.56) = 80.58kN
sSTUDIES
Longitudinal Wall
• (31.6 x 0.150 x 2.88 x 23.56) = 321.62kN
• (2)(3.95)(0.15)(2.88)(23.56) = 80.41kN
• (3)(7.90 x 0.150 x 2.88 x 23.56) = 241.22kN
• (31.6 x 1m x 0.150 x 23.56) = 111.67kN
STAIRS
• Rise = ((16)(0.20 x 0.150 x 1.5 x 23.56))(2) = 33.93kN

• Run = (16)(0.25 x 0.150 x 1.5 x 23.56))(2) = 42.41kN
• Landing area = (2 x 3 x 0.150 x 23.56)(2) = 42.41kN
TOTAL = 3483.9 kN
GROUND LEVEL
• C-1 = (24)(2.8)(0.50 x 0.50)(23.56) = 395.81kN
• C-3 = ((9) (2.8) (0.30 x 0.30) (23.56) = 148.43kN
beam)
LONGITUDINAL BEAM
• B-1 = (24)(4.5)(0.30 x 0.60)(23.56) = 458.01kN
• B-4 = (8)(4.5) (0.25 x 0.50)(23.56) = 106.02kN
TRANSVERSE BEAM
• B-1 = (24)(4.5)(0.30 x 0.60)(23.56) = 458.01kN
• B-4 = (8)(4.5) (0.25 x 0.50)(23.56) = 106.02kN
SLAB
• = {(0.125)(3.95x3.45)(23.56) x 16} + {(0.125)(3.95x2)(23.56) x 8}
= 828.25kN
WALL
Transverse Wall
• (2)(8.975 x 0.150 x 2.88 x 23.56) = 182.69kN
• (4)(6.9 x 0.150 x 2.88 x 23.56) = 280.91kN
• (2)(4 x 0.150 x 2.85 x 23.56) = 80.58kN
Longitudinal Wall
• (31.6 x 0.150 x 2.88 x 23.56) = 321.62kN
• (2)(3.95)(0.15)(2.88)(23.56) = 80.41kN
• (3)(7.90 x 0.150 x 2.88 x 23.56) = 241.22kN
• (31.6 x 1m x 0.150 x 23.56) = 111.67kN
P a g e |77
sSTUDIES
STAIRS
• Rise = ((16)(0.20 x 0.150 x 1.5 x 23.56))(2) = 33.93kN

• Run = (16)(0.25 x 0.150 x 1.5 x 23.56))(2) = 42.41kN
TOTAL = 3517.64 kN
THIRD AND SECOND LEVEL
• C-2 = (24)(2.8)(0.40 x 0.40)(23.56) = 253.32kN
• C-3 = (9)(2.8)(0.30 x 0.30)(23.56) = 53.43kN
beam)
LONGITUDINAL BEAM
• B-1 = (24)(4.5)(0.30 x 0.60)(23.56) = 458.01kN
• B-2 = (8)(4.5) (0.25 x 0.50)(23.56) = 106.02kN
TRANSVERSE BEAM
• G-1 = (18)(4)(0.30 x 0.60)(23.56) = 305.34kN
• G-2 = (9)(2.5)(0.30 x 0.60)(23.56) = 95.42kN
SLAB
• = {(0.125)(3.95x3.45)(23.56) x 16} + {(0.125)(3.95x2)(23.56) x 8}
= 828.25kN
WALL
Transverse Wall
• (2)(8.975 x 0.150 x 2.88 x 23.56) = 182.69kN
• (4)(6.9 x 0.150 x 2.88 x 23.56) = 280.91kN
• (2)(4 x 0.150 x 2.85 x 23.56) = 80.58kN
Longitudinal Wall
• (31.6 x 0.150 x 2.88 x 23.56) = 321.62kN
• (2)(3.95)(0.15)(2.88)(23.56) = 80.41kN
• (3)(7.90 x 0.150 x 2.88 x 23.56) = 241.22kN
• (31.6 x 1m x 0.150 x 23.56) = 111.67kN
STAIRS
• Rise = ((16)(0.20 x 0.150 x 1.5 x 23.56))(2) = 33.93kN

• Run = (16)(0.25 x 0.150 x 1.5 x 23.56))(2) = 42.41kN
TOTAL = 3744.53 KN
P a g e |78
sSTUDIES
TOTAL WEIGHT = 16,264.71 KN
Figure 9:Typical Column Plan

P a g e |79
BASE SHEAR:
sSTUDIES
V= CV W
RT
; Cv = 0.64Nv -------------Corresponding to Soil Profile Type sd
; Nv = 1.6 -------------(Corresonding to seismic source type
A- less than 5km from source to site)
Cv = 0.64(1.6) = 1.024
I= 1.0 -------------(STANDARD OCCUPANCY)
T= Ct (hn)3/4 ; Ct = 0.0731 (Reinforced Concrete)

hn = 13.6m
T = 0.0731 = 0.52 sec
R = 8.5 (Concrete SMRF-2001, SRCMF NSCP 2010)
V=
V = 0.2316 (16,264.71)
V = 3766.91 kN CHECK
CHECK BASE SHEAR:
2.5Ca W
1. V = ; Ca = 0.44Na ;Na = 1.2
𝑅
Ca = 0.44(1.2)
Ca= 0.528
2.5(0.528)(1)
V=V= (16264.71) = 3525.81 kN GOVERNS!
8.5
2. V = 0.11 CaIW = 0.11(0.528)(1.0) (16264.71)

V = 1141.72 kN
3. V = W
; z = 0.40
V= (19657.74)
V=858.86 kN
V = 3525.81 kN → (Strength Value)
P a g e |80
DISTRIBUTION OF BASE SHEAR OVER THE HEIGHT OF THE STRUCTURE
sSTUDIES
𝑊𝑥ℎ𝑥
∑𝑛𝑖 =1 𝑊𝑖ℎ
LEVEL Wx (kN) hx (m) Wx X hx 𝑖 Fx (kN) Sa (g)
ROOF DECK 2,001 13.6 29859.34 0.2511 766.54 0.349
4 3,483.9 10.2 44528.51 0.3745 1143.24 0.262
3 3,517.64 6.8 29685.74 0.2496 761.96 0.175
2 3,517.64 3.4 14842.87 0.11248 343.37 0.077

GROUND
FLOOR 3,744.53 0 0 0 0 0
𝑊𝑥ℎ𝑥
= 118916.46
∑𝑛𝑖 =1 𝑊𝑖 ℎ 𝑖
Table 6: Distribution of Base shear
HORIZONTAL DISTRIBUTION SHEAR
Ix = ; Iy =
P a g e |81
sSTUDIES
MARK SIZE I
R=
B H Ix Iy ∆x ∆y Rx Ry Rx Ry
C1 0.6 0.6 0.011 0.011 0.0153 0.0153 65.40 65.40 1 1
Column Height = 3.4 m
Use F = 1000 KN (assume any value for computing relative rigidity, but not for
actual rigidity)
E = 2.1 x kpa (reinforced concrete)
Ec= 4730 √fc’ (MPa) (modulus of elasticity of concrete)

G = 0.40 E (shear modulus)
P a g e |82
Center of Mass
sSTUDIES
Consider the slab mass, determine the centroid
Ym = 5.25 m
Xm = 18 m
CENTER OF RIGIDITY
∑ Rx = 67.411 ; ∑ Ry =67.41
Take ∑ of moment of rigidities about Grid A

67.411X = (7.49)(4.5) + (7.49)(9) + (7.49)(13.5) + (7.49)(18) + (7.49)(22.5) + (7.49) (27) +
(7.49)(31.5) + (7.49)(36)
X = 17.99 m
Take ∑ of moment of rigidities about Grid 1

36Y = (9)(2.5) + (9)(6.5) + (9)(10.5) Y = 4.875 m
Eccentricities ex = 18-18= 0 ey =5.25-4.875 =0.375
Accidental Eccentricity ex acc. = 5%(36) = 1.8 m ey acc. = 5%(15) = 0.75 m
Design Eccentricity edx = ex + exacc =0+ 1.8 = 1.8 m edy = ey + eyacc Design
Eccentricity edx =0.375+0.75 = 1.125 m
Torsional Moment
= F x edx = (1.00)(1.8) = 1.8 kN-m ; let F = 1.00 KN (assumed)
= F x edy = (1.00)(1.125) = 1.125 kN-m (per kN of force along X – direction)
P a g e |83
Horizontal Distribution Forces
sSTUDIES
Table 7:Horizontal Distribution Forces

P a g e |84
sSTUDIES
Figure 10:HDF at Frame A-Frame B
Figure 11:HDF at Frame C-Frame D

P a g e |85
sSTUDIES
Figure 12:HDF at Frame 1-Frame 9
Figure 12:HDF at Frame 2-Frame 8

P a g e |86
sSTUDIES
Figure 13::HDF at Frame 3-Frame 7
Figure 14::HDF at Frame 4-Frame 6

P a g e |87
sSTUDIES
Figure 15::HDF at Frame 5
Figure 16:Horizontal Frame Forces

P a g e |88
Appendix D
sSTUDIES
EARTHQUAKE (PORTAL METHOD)
E- Force Resisting Structural Systems of Concrete Table 208-11
R - Numerical coefficient representative = 8.5 (208.11)
Ft=0.07TV= The concentrated force Ft, at the top which addition to Fn
Fx= (V-Ft)Wxhx/(∑_(i=1)^n▒Wihi) = at each level designated as x the force Fx
T= elastic fundamental period of vibration of structure in the direction under

consideration
T= C_T 〖(hn) 〗 ^(3/4)
C_T= 0.0731 for reinforced concrete moment resisting force and eccentrically
braced force. (208.5.2.2)267
Zone Factor Z= 0.40
Seismic Importance Factor 1= 1.00
Na= Near source factor used in determination of Ca
Nv= Near source factor used in determination of Cv
Ca= Seismic coefficient, (table 208-7) =0.40Na
Cv= Seismic coefficient, (table 208-8) =0.56Nv
COLUMN SHEARS
4th FLOOR LEVEL
V = 263.80 kN
Let V = shear carried by each exterior column
2V = shear carried by each interior column
V + 2V + 2V + V = 263.80 kN
6V = 263.80
P a g e |89
sSTUDIES
V= 43.97 kN (exterior column)
2V = 87.94 kN (interior column)

3rd FLOOR LEVEL
Total shear = 263.80 + 328.88 = 592.68 kN

6V = 592.68 kN
V = 98.78 kN (exterior column)
2nd FLOOR LEVEL
Total Shear = 263.80 + 328.88 + 230.69 = 823.37 kN
6V = 8 23.37kN
1st FLOOR LEVEL
Total Shear = 263.80 + 328.88 + 230.69 + 116.34 = 939.71 kN
6V = 939.71 kN

P a g e |90
COLUMN MOMENTS
sSTUDIES
= (h / 2) ; h / 2 = 1.7 m
= = 43.97(1.7) = 74.75 kN-m = =

= = 98.78(1.7) = 167.93 kN-m = =
= = 137.23(1.7) = 233.291 kN-m = =
= = 156.62(1.7) = 266.25 kN-m = =

= = 87.94(1.7) = 149.50 kN-m = =
= = 197.56(1.7) = 335.85 kN-m = =
= = 274.46(1.7) = 466.58 kN-m = =

= = 313.24(1.7) = 532.51 kN-m =
Figure 17:Girder Moments

P a g e |91
GIRDER SHEARS
sSTUDIES
KN
KN
KN
KN
KN
KN
KN
KN
KN
KN
KN
KN
P a g e |92
sSTUDIES
Figure 18:Column Axial Forces

P a g e |93
SHEAR & MOMENT
sSTUDIES
Roof deck
Longitudinal (Frame 4)
P a g e |94
sSTUDIES
P a g e |95
sSTUDIES
Transverse
Grid A,B,C,D,E,F,G,H, & I
4TH, 3RD, & 2ND FLOOR
P a g e |96
sSTUDIES
P a g e |97
sSTUDIES
Transverse
Grid A,B,D,F,H, & I
Transverse
Grid A,B,D,F,H, & I
P a g e |98
Shear diagram
sSTUDIES
Figure 19:Longitudinal (frame 4)

P a g e |99
sSTUDIES

P a g e |100
sSTUDIES
Figure 23:Transverse (grid A, B,D, F, H, & I)
Figure 24:Transverse (grid C, E , & G)

P a g e |101
Moment Diagram
sSTUDIES

P a g e |102
sSTUDIES

P a g e |103
sSTUDIES
Figure 29:Transverse (grid A, B,D, F, H, & I)
Figure 30:Transverse (grid C, E , & G)

P a g e |104
sSTUDIES
Tributary area
Figure 31:Tributary area
Slab diaphragm
Figure 32:Slab diaphragm

P a g e |105
Appendix E
sSTUDIES
SLAB DESIGN
Design Requirements:
Unit weight of concrete = 23.56kN/𝑚3

Yeild strength, fy = 415 Mpa (grade 60)
Modulus of elasticity for concrete, Ec = 200,000.00 MPa
Capacity reduction factor = 0.90
Concrete compressive strength, f’c = 20.7MPa
Slab Loads:
TYPICAL FLOOR
Classroom Live Load 1.90 kPa
Corridor above Ground floor Live Load 3.83 kPa
Corridor on Ground floor Live Load 4.8 kPa
Live Load on Urinals 2.0 kPa
Floor Finish 1.5 kPa
Stair-Case Loadings 4.0 kPa
Roof Deck Live Load (same as occupancy) 1.90kPa
P a g e |106
Roof deck slab
sSTUDIES
Considering slab 1
Figure 33:slab 1 at Roofdeck
Calculations
Design Data for Slab 1

Long span, La = 4.5 m
Short span, Lb = 4.0 m
Beam width, b = 0.25 m
Beam depth, h = 0.45 m
Dead Load = 6.13kPa
Live Load = 2.90 kPa
Analysis of Two-way Slab using Direct Design Method (NSCP 2015, 408.10.1)
Type of Slab
(two-way slab as calculated in preliminary sizing)
Slab Thickness
(h=125 mm as calculated in preliminary sizing)
Factored load
Wu = 1.2DL +1.6LL
Wu = 1.2(6.13) +1.6(2.9)
Wu = 12 kPa
P a g e |107
Effective depth of the Slab (d)
sSTUDIES
d= d = t - clear protective cover - center of two bars
; clear protective cover = 20mm (minimum NSCP)
; using Ø12 bar
d = 125 - 20 – 12/2 = 99 mm
Analysis of short span for slab 1
Middle Strip
Static Moment (Mo): (NSCP 2015 section 408.10.3.1Total factored static moment)
1
Mo = (Wu𝐿1 )𝐿𝑛2 (NSCP section 408.10.3.2)
8
1
Mo = 8 (12)(4.5)( 3.7)2
Mo = 92.41 kN-m
By interpolation:
4.5
= 1.13
4
0.75−0.45 0.75−𝑥
= 1.0−1.13 , x = 0.71 (from NSCP 2-15, Table 408.105.1)
1.0−2.0
For Negative Moment of Considered Section:

-Mn = (0.65) (Mo) = (0.65) (92.41) (NSCP 2015 section 408.10.4.1)
- Mn = 60.0665 kN – m
For Positive Moment of Considered Section:
+Mp = (0.35) (Mo) = (0.35) (92.41) (NSCP SECTION 108.10.4.1)
+Mu = 32.3435 kN – m
For Negative Ultimate Moment of Considered Section:

-Mu = x(0.65) (Mo) (NSCP 2015 section 408.10.5.1)
-Mu = 0.71(0.65) (Mo) = 0.71(0.65) (92.41)
- Mu = 42.65 kN – m
NEGATIVVE
P a g e |108
sSTUDIES
+Mu = 0.71(0.35) (Mo) = 0.71(0.35) (92.41)
+Mu = 22.96 kN – m
Checking if Safe in Flexure: considering 1m strip and using 12mm ∅ bar

(Negative Moment)
Muactual ≤ (∅)(b)(deff)2(f’c)(q)(1-0.59q)
42.65 x106 ≤ (0.9) (1000mm) (99)2(20.7) (w)(1-0.59w)
w = 0.27976
𝑤𝑓′𝑐 (0.27976)(20.7)
𝜌= = = 0.01395
𝑓𝑦 415
1.4 1.4
𝜌min = = = 0.00337
𝑓𝑦 415
√𝑓𝑐 √20.7
𝜌min = = = 0.00274
4𝑓𝑦 4(415)
𝜌 > 𝜌min Use: 𝜌
Area of Steel:
As = 𝜌bd
As = (0.01395) (1000) (99)
As = 1381.05 mm2
No. of Steel:
1381.05
n12 = 𝜋 = 12.21 say 12 pcs per 1m strip
(122 )
4
Spacing of 12mm Bar:
𝑏
As = As12mm ( )
𝑆
𝜋 1000
1381.05 = 4 (122 )( ) 𝑆
S= 81.89 mm
Spacing limits for Slab Reinforcement NSCP 2015 407.7.2 370
S < 3h = 3(400) = 1200 mm

S < 450mm
𝑆 = 81.89 mm say 80 mm < 3t and 450mm (ok!)
Adopt 12 mm ∅ spaced at 80 mm o.c.
P a g e |109
sSTUDIES
(Positive Moment)
22.96 x106 ≤ (0.9) (1000mm) (99)2(20.7) (w)(1-0.59w)
w = 0.01637
𝑤𝑓′𝑐 (0.01637)(20.7)
𝜌= = = 0.000817
𝑓𝑦 415
1.4 1.4
𝜌min = = = 0.00337
𝑓𝑦 415
√𝑓𝑐 √20.7
𝜌min = = = 0.00274
4𝑓𝑦 4(415)
𝜌 < 𝜌min Use: 𝜌min
Area of Steel:
As = 𝜌bd
As = (0.00337) (1000) (99)
As = 333.63 mm2
No. of Steel:
333.63
(122 )
4
𝑏
As = As12mm ( )
𝑆
𝜋 2 1000
333.63= (12 )( )
4 𝑆
S= 339 mm
Spacing limits for Slab Reinforcement (NSCP 2015 407.7.2 370)
S < 3h = 3(400) = 1200 mm

S < 450mm
𝑆 = 339 mm say 300mm < 3t and 450mm (ok!)
Adopt 12 mm ∅ spaced at 300mm o.c.
Analysis of long span for slab 1
Middle Strip
Static Moment:
1
Mo = 8 (Wu𝐿1 )𝐿𝑛2
P a g e |110
1
Mo = 8 (12)(4)( 4.2)2
sSTUDIES
Mo = 105.84kN-m
By interpolation:
4
= 0.89
4.5
0.75−0.45 0.75−𝑥
1.0−2.0
= 1.0−1.13 , x = 0.78 (from NSCP 2-15, Table 408.105.1)

-Mu = 0.78(0.65) (Mo) = 0.78(0.65) (105.84)
- Mu = 53.66 kN – m
+Mu = 0.78(0.35) (Mo) = 0.78(0.35) (105.84)
+Mu = 28.89 kN – m

(Negative Moment)
Muactual ≤ (∅)(b)(deff)2(f’c)(q)(1-0.59w)
53.66 x106 ≤ (0.9) (1000mm) (99)2(20.7) (w)(1-0.59w)
w = 0.37832
𝑤𝑓′𝑐 (0.37832)(20.7)
𝜌= = = 0.01887
𝑓𝑦 415
1.4 1.4
𝜌min = = = 0.00337
𝑓𝑦 415
√𝑓𝑐 √20.7
𝜌min = = = 0.00274
4𝑓𝑦 4(415)
Area of Steel:
As = 𝜌bd
As = (0.01887) (1000) (99)
As = 1868.13mm2
P a g e |111
No. of Steel:
sSTUDIES
1868.13
(122 )
4
𝑏
As = As12mm ( )
𝑆
𝜋 1000
1868.13 = 4 (122 )( ) 𝑆
S= 60.54 mm
S < 3h = 3(400) = 1200 mm

S < 450mm

(Positive Moment)
28.89 x106 ≤ (0.9) (1000mm) (99)2(20.7) (w)(1-0.59w)
w = 0.17663
𝑤𝑓′𝑐 (0.17663)(20.7)
𝜌= = = 0.00881
𝑓𝑦 415
1.4 1.4
𝜌min = = = 0.00337
𝑓𝑦 415
√𝑓𝑐 √20.7
𝜌min = = = 0.00274
4𝑓𝑦 4(415)
𝜌min < 𝜌 Use: 𝜌
Area of Steel:
As = 𝜌bd
As = (0.00881) (1000) (99)
As = 872.19mm2
No. of Steel:
872.19
(122 )
4
P a g e |112
sSTUDIES
𝑏
As = As12mm ( )
𝑆
𝜋 2 1000
872.19= 4 (12 )( )
𝑆
S= 129.67 mm
S < 3h = 3(400) = 1200 mm

S < 450mm
𝑆 = 129.67 mm say 130mm < 3t and 450mm (ok!)
Slab 2
Figure 5:Slab 2 at roofdeck

P a g e |113
Calculations
sSTUDIES
Type of Slab
Slab Thickness
Factored load
Wu = 1.2DL +1.6LL
Wu = 1.2(6.13) +1.6(2.9)
Wu = 12 kPa

; using Ø12 bar
d = 125 - 20 – 12/2 = 99 mm
Middle Strip
Static Moment:
1
1
Mo = 8 (12)(4.5)( 2.2)2
Mo = 32.67kN-m
By interpolation:
4.5
= 1.8
2.5
0.75−0.45 0.75−𝑥
= 1.0−1.8 , x = 0.51 (from NSCP 2-15, Table 408.105.1)
1.0−2.0
P a g e |114
sSTUDIES
-Mu = 0.51(0.65) (Mo) = 0.71(0.65) (32.67)
- Mu = 10.83 kN – m
+Mu = 0.51(0.35) (Mo) = 0.71(0.35) (32.67)
+Mu = 5.83 kN – m

(Negative Moment)
10.83 x106 ≤ (0.9) (1000mm) (99)2(20.7) (w)(1-0.59w)
w = 0.06155
𝑤𝑓′𝑐 (0.06155)(20.7)
𝑤= = = 0.00307
𝑓𝑦 415
1.4 1.4
𝜌min = = = 0.00337
𝑓𝑦 415
√𝑓𝑐 √20.7
𝜌min = = = 0.00274
4𝑓𝑦 4(415)
𝜌min = 0.00337 > 𝜌 Use: 𝜌min = 0.00337
Area of Steel:
As = 𝜌min bd
As = (0.00337) (1000) (99)
As = 333.63 mm2
No. of Steel:
333.63
4
(122 )
𝑏
As = As12mm ( )
𝑆
𝜋 2 1000
333.63 = 4 (12 )( ) 𝑆
S= 338.99 mm
S < 3h = 3(400) = 1200 mm

S < 450mm
P a g e |115
sSTUDIES
(Positive Moment)
5.83 x106 ≤ (0.9) (1000mm) (99)2(20.7) (w)(1-0.59w)
w = 0.03255
𝑤𝑓′𝑐 (0.03255)(20.7)
𝜌= = = 0.00162
𝑓𝑦 415
1.4 1.4
𝜌min = = = 0.00337
𝑓𝑦 415
√𝑓𝑐 √20.7
𝜌min = = = 0.00274
4𝑓𝑦 4(415)
𝜌 < 𝜌min Use: 𝜌min
Area of Steel:
As = 𝜌bd
As = (0.00337) (1000) (99)
As = 333.63 mm2
No. of Steel:
333.63
(122 )
4
𝑏
As = As12mm ( )
𝑆
𝜋 2 1000
333.63= 4 (12 )( ) 𝑆
S= 338.99 mm
S < 3h = 3(400) = 1200 mm

S < 450mm
P a g e |116
sSTUDIES
Middle Strip
Static moment
1
Mo = (Wu𝐿1 )𝐿𝑛2
8
1
Mo = 8 (12) (4) (4.2 )2
Mo = 105.84 kN-m
By interpolation:
2.5
= 0.56
4.5
0.90−0.75 0.90−𝑥
= 0.50−0.56 , x = 0.88 (from NSCP 2-15, Table 408.105.1)
0.50−1.0

-Mu = 0.88 (0.65) (Mo)
- Mu = 0.88 (0.65) (105.84)
- Mu = 60.54 kN – m
+Mu = 0.88(0.35) (Mo)
+Mu = 0.88(0.35) (105.84)
+Mu = 32.60 kN – m

(Negative Moment)
60.54 x106 ≤ (0.9) (1000mm) (99)2(20.7) (w)(1-0.59w)
w = 0.45221
𝑤𝑓′𝑐 (0.45221)(20.7)
𝜌= = = 0.02105
𝑓𝑦 415
1.4 1.4
𝜌min = = = 0.00337
𝑓𝑦 415
√𝑓𝑐 √20.7
𝜌min = = = 0.00274
4𝑓𝑦 4(415)
Area of Steel:
As = 𝜌bd
As = (0.02105) (1000) (99)
As = 2084 mm2
P a g e |117
No. of Steel:
sSTUDIES
2084
(122 )
4
𝑏
As = As12mm ( )
𝑆
𝜋 1000
2084 = 4 (122 )( ) 𝑆
S= 54.26 mm
S < 3h = 3(400) = 1200 mm

S < 450mm

(Positive Moment)
32.60 x106 ≤ (0.9) (1000mm) (99)2(20.7) (w)(1-0.59w)
w = 0.20281
𝑤𝑓′𝑐 (0.20281)(20.7)
𝜌= = = 0.01012
𝑓𝑦 415
1.4 1.4
𝜌min = = = 0.00337
𝑓𝑦 415
√𝑓𝑐 √20.7
𝜌min = = = 0.00274
4𝑓𝑦 4(415)
Area of Steel:
As = 𝜌bd
As = (0.01012) (1000) (99)
As = 1001.88 mm2
P a g e |118
No. of Steel:
sSTUDIES
1001.88
(122 )
4
𝑏
As = As12mm ( )
𝑆
𝜋 1000
1001.88 = 4 (122 )( )𝑆
S= 112.89 mm
S < 3h = 3(400) = 1200 mm

S < 450mm
P a g e |119
Fourth Floor to second floor slab
sSTUDIES
Considering slab 1
Figure 6:Slab 1 at Fourth Floor
Unit weight of concrete = 23.56kN/𝑚3

Yeild strength, fy = 415 Mpa (grade 60)
Modulus of elasticity for concrete, Ec = 200,000.00 MPa
Capacity reduction factor = 0.90
P a g e |120
Calculations
sSTUDIES
Design Data for Slab 1( urinals)
Dead Load = 6.13 kPa
Live Load = 2 kPa
Column size = 400mm x 400mm
Type of Slab
Slab Thickness
Factored load
Wu = 1.2DL +1.6LL
Wu = 1.2(6.13) +1.6(2)
Wu = 10.556 kPa
; using Ø12 bar
d = 125 - 20 – 12/2 = 99 mm
Middle Strip
Static Moment:
1
1
Mo = (10.556)(4.5)( 3.6)2
8
Mo = 76.95 kN-m
P a g e |121
By interpolation:
sSTUDIES 4.5
= 1.13
4
0.75−0.45 0.75−𝑥
= 1.0−1.13 , x = 0.71 (from NSCP 2-15, Table 408.105.1)
1.0−2.0

-Mu = 0.71(0.65) (76.95) = 0.71(0.65) (76.95)
- Mu = 35.51 kN – m
+Mu = 0.71(0.35) (Mo) = 0.71(0.35) (76.95)
+Mu = 19.12 kN – m
(Negative Moment)
35.51 x106 ≤ (0.9) (1000mm) (99)2(20.7) (w)(1-0.59w)
w = 0.22411
𝑤𝑓′𝑐 (0.22411)(20.7)
𝜌= = = 0.01118
𝑓𝑦 415
1.4 1.4
𝜌min = = = 0.00337
𝑓𝑦 415
√𝑓𝑐 √20.7
𝜌min = = = 0.00274
4𝑓𝑦 4(415)
Area of Steel:
As = 𝜌bd
As = (0.01118) (1000) (99)
As = 1106.82 mm2
No. of Steel:
1106.82
(122 )
4
P a g e |122
sSTUDIES
𝑏
As = As12mm ( )
𝑆
𝜋 1000
11086.82 = 4 (122 )( ) 𝑆
S= 102.18 mm
S < 3h = 3(400) = 1200 mm

S < 450mm
(Positive Moment)
19.12 x106 ≤ (0.9) (1000mm) (99)2(20.7) (w)(1-0.59w)
w = 0.11213
(0.11213)(20.7)
𝜌 = 𝑤𝑓′𝑐 = = 0.00559
𝑓𝑦 415
1.4 1.4
𝜌min = = = 0.00337
𝑓𝑦 415
√𝑓𝑐 √20.7
𝜌min = = = 0.00274
4𝑓𝑦 4(415)
Area of Steel:
As = 𝜌bd
As = (0.00559) (1000) (99)
As = 553.41 mm2
No. of Steel:
553.41
(122 )
4
𝑏
As = As12mm ( )
𝑆
P a g e |123
𝜋 1000
553.41= 4 (122 )(
sSTUDIES
)
𝑆
S= 204.36 mm
S < 3h = 3(400) = 1200 mm

S < 450mm
Middle strip
Static moment
1
Mo = 8
(Wu𝐿1 )𝐿𝑛2
1
Mo = 8 (10.556) (4) (4.1 )2
Mo = 88.72 kN-m
By interpolation:
4
= 0.89
4.5
0.90−0.75 0.90−𝑥
= 0.50−0.89 , x = 0.78 (from NSCP 2-15, Table 408.105.1)
0.50−1.0

-Mu = 0.78 (0.65) (Mo)
- Mu = 0.78 (0.65) (88.72)
- Mu = 44.98 kN – m

+Mu = 0.78(0.35) (88.72)
+Mu = 0.78(0.35) (105.84)
+Mu = 24.22 kN – m
P a g e |124
sSTUDIES
(Negative Moment)
44.98 x106 ≤ (0.9) (1000mm) (99)2(20.7) (w)(1-0.59w)
w = 0.29913
𝑤𝑓′𝑐 (0.29913)(20.7)
𝜌= = = 0.01492
𝑓𝑦 415
1.4 1.4
𝜌min = = = 0.00337
𝑓𝑦 415
√𝑓𝑐 √20.7
𝜌min = = = 0.00274
4𝑓𝑦 4(415)
Area of Steel:
As = 𝜌bd
As = (0.01492) (1000) (99)
As = 1477.08 mm2
No. of Steel:
1477.08
(122 )
4
𝑏
As = As12mm ( )
𝑆
𝜋 1000
1477.08 = 4 (122 )( ) 𝑆
S= 76.57 mm
S < 3h = 3(400) = 1200 mm , S < 450mm


(Positive Moment)
24.22 x106 ≤ (0.9) (1000mm) (99)2(20.7) (w)(1-0.59w)
w = 0.14506
𝑤𝑓′𝑐 (0.14506)(20.7)
𝜌= = = 0.00724
𝑓𝑦 415
P a g e |125
1.4 1.4
𝜌min =
sSTUDIES
= 415 = 0.00337
𝑓𝑦
√𝑓𝑐 √20.7
𝜌min = = = 0.00274
4𝑓𝑦 4(415)
Area of Steel:
As = 𝜌bd
As = (0.00724) (1000) (99)
As = 716.76 mm2
No. of Steel:
716.76
(122 )
4
𝑏
As = As12mm ( )
𝑆
𝜋 2 1000
716.76 = 4 (12 )( ) 𝑆
S= 157.79 mm
S < 3h = 3(400) = 1200 mm

S < 450mm
P a g e |126
Slab 2(Hallway)
sSTUDIES
Figure 7:Figure 32:slab 2 (Hallway at fourthfloor)

Calculations
Type of Slab
Slab Thickness
Factored load
Wu = 1.2DL +1.6LL
Wu = 1.2(6.13) +1.6(1.9)
Wu = 10.40 kPa

P a g e |127
sSTUDIES ; clear protective cover = 20mm (minimum NSCP)
; using Ø12 bar
d = 125 - 20 – 12/2 = 99 mm
Middle Strip
Static Moment:
1
1
Mo = (10.40)(4.5)( 3.6)2
8
Mo = 75.82 kN-m
By interpolation:
4.5
= 1.13
4
0.75−0.45 0.75−𝑥
1.0−2.0
= 1.0−1.8 , x = 0.71 (from NSCP 2-15, Table 408.105.1)

-Mu = 0.71(0.65) (Mo) = 0.71(0.65) (75.82)
- Mu = 35 kN – m
+Mu = 0.71(0.35) (Mo) = 0.71(0.35) (75.82)
+Mu = 18.84 kN – m
(Negative Moment)
35 x106 ≤ (0.9) (1000mm) (99)2(20.7) (w)(1-0.59w)
w = 0.22032
P a g e |128
𝑤𝑓′𝑐 (0.22032)(20.7)
𝜌 = 𝑓𝑦 =
sSTUDIES = 0.01099
415
1.4 1.4
𝜌min = = = 0.00337
𝑓𝑦 415
√𝑓𝑐 √20.7
𝜌min = = = 0.00274
4𝑓𝑦 4(415)

Area of Steel:
As = 𝜌bd
As = (0.01099) (1000) (99)
As = 1088.01 mm2
No. of Steel:
1088.01
(122 )
4
𝑏
As = As12mm ( )
𝑆
𝜋 1000
1088.01 = 4 (122 )( ) 𝑆
S= 103.95 mm
S < 3h = 3(400) = 1200 mm

S < 450mm

(Positive Moment)
18.84 x106 ≤ (0.9) (1000mm) (99)2(20.7) (w)(1-0.59w)
w = 0.11037
𝑤𝑓′𝑐 (0.11037)(20.7)
𝜌= = = 0.00551
𝑓𝑦 415
1.4 1.4
𝜌min = = = 0.00337
𝑓𝑦 415
P a g e |129
√𝑓𝑐 √20.7
𝜌min =
sSTUDIES = 4(415) = 0.00274
4𝑓𝑦
Area of Steel:
As = 𝜌bd
As = (0.00551) (1000) (99)
As = 545.49 mm2
No. of Steel:
545.49
(122 )
4
𝑏
As = As12mm ( )
𝑆
𝜋 2 1000
545.49= 4 (12 )( ) 𝑆
S= 207.33 mm
S < 3h = 3(400) = 1200 mm

S < 450mm
Middle Strip
Static moment
1
Mo = (Wu𝐿1 )𝐿𝑛2
8
1
Mo = 8 (10.40) (4) (4.1)2
Mo = 87.41 kN-m
By interpolation:
4
= 0.89
4.5
0.90−0.75 0.90−𝑥
0.50−1.0
= 0.50−0.56 , x = 0.78 (from NSCP 2-15, Table 408.105.1)
P a g e |130
sSTUDIES
-Mu = 0.78 (0.65) (Mo)
- Mu = 0.78 (0.65) (87.41)
- Mu = 44.32 kN – m
+Mu = 0.78(0.35) (Mo)
+Mu = 0.78(0.35) (87.41)
+Mu = 23.86 kN – m
(Negative Moment)
44.32 x106 ≤ (0.9) (1000mm) (99)2(20.7) (w)(1-0.59w)
w = 0.29358
𝑤𝑓′𝑐 (0.29358)(20.7)
𝜌= = = 0.01464
𝑓𝑦 415
1.4 1.4
𝜌min = = = 0.00337
𝑓𝑦 415
√𝑓𝑐 √20.7
𝜌min = = = 0.00274
4𝑓𝑦 4(415)
Area of Steel:
As = 𝜌bd
As = (0.01464) (1000) (99)
As = 1449.36 mm2
No. of Steel:
1449.36
(122 )
4
𝑏
As = As12mm ( )
𝑆
𝜋 1000
1449.36 = 4 (122 )( ) 𝑆
S= 78.03 mm
S < 3h = 3(400) = 1200 mm

S < 450mm
P a g e |131
sSTUDIES
(Positive Moment)
23.86 x106 ≤ (0.9) (1000mm) (99)2(20.7) (w)(1-0.59w)
w = 0.14269
𝑤𝑓′𝑐 (0.14269)(20.7)
𝜌= = = 0.00712
𝑓𝑦 415
1.4 1.4
𝜌min = = = 0.00337
𝑓𝑦 415
√𝑓𝑐 √20.7
𝜌min = = = 0.00274
4𝑓𝑦 4(415)
Area of Steel:
As = 𝜌bd
As = (0.00712) (1000) (99)
As = 704.88 mm2
No. of Steel:
704.88
(122 )
4
𝑏
As = As12mm ( )
𝑆
𝜋 2 1000
704.88 = 4 (12 )( ) 𝑆
S= 160.45 mm
S < 3h = 3(400) = 1200 mm

S < 450mm
P a g e |132
sSTUDIES
Figure 8: Slab Detailing and Schedule
Figure 9: Slab Detailing and Schedule

P a g e |133
Appendix G
sSTUDIES
BEAM DESIGN
Unit weight of Conc. = 23.56kN/𝑚3

Yeild Strength, fy = 415 Mpa (grade 60)
Modulus of Elasticity for concrete, = 200000.00 MPa
Compressive Block deep, 𝛽 = 0.85
Capacity Reduction factor = 0.90
Concrete compressive strength, f’c = 20.7MPa m
Concrete cover = 50mm (NSCP min. Cc = 40mm)
P a g e |134
ROOF DECK BEAM
sSTUDIES
Framing plan
Parapet Walls
 150mm Concrete Hallow Blocks (CHB), 1.5m High, fully grouted and
plastered on both faces using 16.5 KN/m³ density of unit.
= (2.63 + 2(0.24)) (1.5) = 4.67 KN/m
0.85𝑓′𝑐𝛽600 0.85(20.7)(0.85)600
𝜌bal = 𝑓𝑦(600 + 𝑓𝑦) = = 0.02130
415(600 + 415)
𝜌max = 0.75𝜌bal = 0.75(0.02130) = 0.01598
𝜌 = 0.01351 < 𝜌max = 0.01598

fy 415
ω = ρf′c = 0.01598(20.7) = 0.32037
Rn= 𝑓′𝑐(ω)(1 − 0.59ω) = (20.7)(0.32037) {1-0.59(0.32037)}
Rn= 5.3782
𝑀𝑢 = Øb𝑑 2 Rn
𝑀𝑢
= 𝑏𝑑 2
ØRn
0.85𝑓′𝑐 𝑏𝑓{(𝑡) +(𝑎−𝑡)}(𝑏𝑤)
Asmax = 0.75(
415
P a g e |135
Using 50 mm Concrete Cover
sSTUDIES
Mumax = Øf’cb𝑑 2 w(1-0.59w)

Mumax = 0.90(20.7)(250)(500)2 (0.32037){1-0.59(0.32037)}
Mumax = 302.52kN-m
Longitudinal Beam Section
At Grid D, B, C & A (considering interior span)
Beam size = 250mm x 500mm (from preliminary sizing of beam)

Weight of beam = 0.25m x 0.50m x 23.56 = 3kN/m
DL = 16.87kN/m
LL = 4.35kPa
Left Support & Right Support:

Mumax = 302.52kN-m
Factored Load, Wu = 1.2DL + 1.6LL
Wu = 27.20kN/m
P a g e |136
1
Factored Moment, Mu = - (Wu)(𝐿𝑛 )2
sSTUDIES 11
Mu = -50.07kN-m
50.07 x 106
𝑏𝑑 2=
0.90(5.3782)
Assume d = 1.75b
50.07 x 106
b(1.75𝑏)2 =
0.90(5.3782)
3 6
10.344 𝑥 10
b= √
(1.75)2
b = 150.04mm say 250mm

h = 1.75(250) = 437.5mm say 500mm
ADOPT 250mm x 500mm
main bars Ø
d = h-concrete cover - - stirrups Ø
2
20
= 500 - 50 - - 10
2
d = 430mm
𝐿 𝑓𝑦
Check; hmin = {0.40 + }
16 700
4500 415
= {0.40 + }
16 700
hmin = 279.24mm
Since h = 600 > 279.24 ………..section is ok
if Mu ≤ Mumax , design is Singly Reinforced
if Mu > max, design is Doubly Reinforced
❖Since Mu = 50.07kN-m < Mumax = 302.52kN-m …….Singly reinforced
Mu = Øf’cb𝑑 2 w(1-0.59w)
50.07x106 = 0.90(20.7)(250)(500)2 𝑤(1-0.59w)
w = 0.04415
𝑤𝑓′𝑐 (0.04415)(20.7)
𝜌= = = 0.00220
𝑓𝑦 415
1.4 1.4
𝜌min = = = 0.00337
𝑓𝑦 415
Since: 𝜌 = 0.00220 < 𝜌min = 0.00337
Use: 𝜌min = 0.00337
Area of Steel:
As = 𝜌minbd
As = (0.00337) (250) (430)
As = 362.28mm2
P a g e |137
Using 20mmØ main bar:
sSTUDIES
No. of Steel:
362.28
n12 = 𝜋 = 1.15 say 3 bars
4
(202)
USE: 3-20mm Ø bars

250 = 2cc+2dt+2db+𝑆
250 = 2(50) + 2(10) + 2(20) + 𝑆
𝑆 = 90mm say 100mm
Midspan:
Mumax = 302.52kN-m
Wu = 27.20kN/m
1
Factored Moment, Mu = (Wu)(𝐿𝑛 )2
16
1
= (27.20)(4.5)2
16
Mu = 34.43kN-m
P a g e |138
Computation for effective flange of the T-Beam
sSTUDIES
Figure 10:T- Beam Geometry

Monolithic:
𝐿
b= = 4200
4 4
= 1050mm --------adopt smallest
b = bw + 16t = 250 + 16(125) = 2,250mm
b = spacing center to center = 4000mm
main bars Ø
2
20
= 500 - 50 - - 10
2
d = 430mm
Compression block, assume it is within the flange:

a
𝑀𝑢 = Ø(0.85)(f’c)(a)(𝑏𝑓)(d − )
2
𝑎
34.43x106 = 0.90(0.85)(20.7)(𝑎)(1050)(430 − )
2
a = 4.84mm
Steel Area Required:

T=C
As(fy) = 0.85(f’c)(a)(𝑏𝑓)
As(415) = 0.85(20.7)(4.84)(1050)
As = 215.46 mm2
P a g e |139
Check for NSCP minimum steel area:
sSTUDIES
𝐴𝑠𝑚𝑖𝑛 =𝜌min(b)(d)
1.4 1.4
;𝜌min = = = 0.00337
𝑓𝑦 415
𝐴𝑠𝑚𝑖𝑛 = (0.00337)(250)(430)
𝐴𝑠𝑚𝑖𝑛 = 362.28 mm2
Try 20mmØ main bar:

No. of Steel:
𝐴𝑠
n=𝜋
(202)
4
362.28
n=𝜋 = 1.15 say 3 bars
(202 )
4
USE : 3-20mm Ø bars
𝜋 2
𝐴𝑠𝑎𝑐𝑡𝑢𝑎𝑙 = (20 )(3) = 942.48 mm2
4
Check for maximum steel area:

𝐴𝑠𝑚𝑎𝑥 = 0.75(𝜌b)(b)(d)
0.85(𝑓′𝑐)(𝛽)(600) 0.85(20.7)(0.85)(600)
;𝜌 b = =
𝑓𝑦(𝑓𝑦 + 600) 415(415 + 600)
𝜌b = 0.0213
𝐴𝑠𝑚𝑎𝑥 = 0.75(0.0213)(250)(430)
𝐴𝑠𝑚𝑎𝑥 = 1,717.31 mm2 > 𝐴𝑠𝑎𝑐𝑡𝑢𝑎𝑙 OK!

250 = 2cc+2dt+2db+𝑆
250 = 2(50) + 2(10) + 2(20) + 𝑆
Spacing of Stirrups (Using 10 mm Ø Bar for Stirrups)
@ Critical Section (d = 430 mm), L = 4.5m

𝑊𝑢 (𝐿𝑛) 27.20 (4.5)
𝑅𝑒𝑎𝑐𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛𝑠, V = = = 61.209kN
2 2
𝑉𝑢𝑑 = 61.209 − 27.20(0.430)
𝑉𝑢𝑑 = 49.51 𝐾𝑁
P a g e |140
sSTUDIES
IF:
⚫ Vu ≤ 0.50ØVc ( no need for stirrups)
⚫ 0.50ØVc < Vu < ØVc (minimum area of stirrups needed)
𝐴𝑣𝑚𝑖𝑛 𝑏𝑤
Using , = 0.35(√𝑓′𝑐)( )
𝑆 𝑓𝑦
⚫ Vu > ØVc (for spacing of the stirrups)
𝐴𝑣(𝑓𝑦)(𝑑)
Using, 𝑉𝑠 =
𝑆
Shear strength of Concrete:
𝑉𝑐
0.17(1.0)(√20.7)(250)(430)
𝑉𝑐 =
1000
𝑉𝑐 = 83.15kN
⚫ ØVc = 0.75(83.15) = 62.36KN
⚫ 0.50ØVc = 0.50(0.75)(83.15) = 31.18KN
For 𝑥1 & 𝑥2 :
61.21 62.36 31.18
= = (2.1−𝑥
2.1 (2.1−𝑥1) 2)
P a g e |141
𝑥sSTUDIES
1 = -39.45mm
𝑥2 = 1,030.27mm
Nominal shear strength of the beam:
Vud 49.51
Vn = = = 66.01KN
Ø 0.75
Shear strength of stirrups:
𝑉𝑠𝑟𝑒𝑞′𝑑 = Vn - Vc = 66.01 - 83.15 = -17.14KN

Check for maximum shear:
𝑉𝑠𝑚𝑎𝑥
𝑉𝑠𝑚𝑎𝑥 = 0.67(√20.7 )(250)(430) = 327.69kN > 𝑉𝑠𝑟𝑒𝑞′𝑑 OK!
Solving for the Spacing of stirrups :

𝜋
𝐴𝑣 = 2{ (102 )} = 157.08𝑚𝑚2
4
𝐴𝑣(𝑓𝑦)(𝑑) 157.08(415)(430)
𝑆= =
𝑉𝑠 327.69(1000)
𝑆 = 85.54mm say 80mm
Check for S(max)
P a g e |142
𝑉𝑠𝑟𝑒𝑞′𝑑 ?
sSTUDIES
0.33(1.0)(√20.7)(250)(430)
𝑉𝑠𝑟𝑒𝑞′𝑑 ? = 161.40kN
1000
𝑉𝑠𝑟𝑒𝑞′𝑑 = -17.14 kN < 161.40kN
Adopt Spacing of Stirrups @ Critical Section = 80mm o. c.
Spacing at the remaining portion of the beam
𝑑 430
Use spacing at the stirrups, 𝑆𝑚𝑎𝑥 = = = 215mm
2 2
Use S = 150mm at the remaining portion of the beam
Splicing( Section 425.5, NSCP 2015):
Splice Distance (min)= 40(db) = 40(20) = 800mm
Development of Reinforcement (Section 425.4, NSCP 2015):
Development Length (min) = 16(db) = 16(20) = 320mm

(Say 350 mm)
Transverse Beam Section
AT GRID A, B, C, D, E, F, G, H & I (considering interior span)
Span of 4m
Beam width, b = 250mm (Preliminary sizing)
Beam deep, d = 500mm (Preliminary sizing)
Weight of beam = 0.25m x 0.50m x 23.56 = 3kN/m
DL = 15.84kN/m
LL = 3.87kPa
= 1.2(15.84) + 1.6(3.87)
Wu = 25.20kN/m
Mumax = 302.52kN-m
1
11
1
= - (25.20)(4)2
11
Mu = -36.65kN-m
P a g e |143
2 36.65 x 106
𝑏𝑑 =
sSTUDIES
0.90(5.3782)
Assume d = 1.75b
36.65 x 106
b(1.75𝑏) =2
0.90(5.3782)
3 6
7.572 x 10
b= √
(1.75)2
b = 135.22mm say 250mm

d = 1.75(250) = 437.5mm say 500mm
ADOPT 250mm x 500mm
main bars Ø
2
20Ø
= 400 - 50 - - 10
2
d = 430mm
𝐿 𝑓𝑦
Check; hmin = {0.40 + }
16 700
4000 415
= {0.40 + }
16 700
hmin = 248.21mm

❖Since Mu = -36.65kN-m < Mumax = 302.52kN-m …….Singly reinforced
Mu = Øf’cb𝑑 2 w(1-0.59w)
36.65x106 = 0.90(20.7)(250)(500)2 𝑤(1-0.59w)
w = 0.03208
𝑤𝑓′𝑐 (0.03208)(20.7)
𝜌= = = 0.00160
𝑓𝑦 415
1.4 1.4
𝜌min = = = 0.00337
𝑓𝑦 415
Since: 𝜌 = 0.00160 < 𝜌min = 0.00337
Use: 𝜌min = 0.00337
Area of Steel:
As = 𝜌minbd
As = (0.00337) (250) (430)
As = 362.28mm2
P a g e |144
sSTUDIES
No. of Steel:
362.28
n12 = 𝜋 = 1.15 say 3 bars
(202)
4
250 = 2cc+2dt+2db+𝑆
250 = 2(50) + 2(10) + 2(20) + 𝑆
Midspan:
Mumax = 302.52kN-m
Wu = 25.20kN/m
1
16
1
= (25.20)(4)2
16
Mu = 25.20kN-m
Monolothic:
𝐿
b= = 3700
4 4
b = bw + 16t = 250 + 16(125) = 2,250mm
P a g e |145
main bars Ø 20
= h-concrete cover -
dsSTUDIES - stirrups Ø = 500 - 50 - - 10
2 2
d = 430mm

a
𝑀𝑢 = Ø(0.85)(f’c)(a)(𝑏𝑓)(d − )
2
𝑎
25.20 x106 = 0.90(0.85)(20.7)(𝑎)(925)(430 − )
2
a = 4.02mm
T=C
As(fy) = 0.85(f’c)(a)(𝑏𝑓)
As(415) = 0.85(20.7)(4.02)(925)
As = 157.66 mm2

1.4 1.4
;𝜌min = = = 0.00337
𝑓𝑦 415
𝐴𝑠𝑚𝑖𝑛 = (0.00337)(250)(430)
𝐴𝑠𝑚𝑖𝑛 = 362.28 mm2

No. of Steel:
𝐴𝑠
n=𝜋
(202)
4
362.28
(202 )
4
𝜋 2
𝐴𝑠𝑎𝑐𝑡𝑢𝑎𝑙 = (20 )(3) = 942.48 mm2
4

0.85(𝑓′𝑐)(𝛽)(600) 0.85(20.7)(0.85)(600)
;𝜌 b = =
𝑓𝑦(𝑓𝑦 + 600) 415(415 + 600)
𝜌b = 0.0213
𝐴𝑠𝑚𝑎𝑥 = 0.75(0.0213)(250)(430)
P a g e |146
sSTUDIES 250 = 2cc+2dt+2db+𝑆
250 = 2(50) + 2(10) + 2(20) + 𝑆
𝑆 = 90mm
(Using 10 mm Ø Bar for Stirrups)

@ Critical Section (d = 430 mm), L = 4m
𝑊𝑢 (𝐿𝑛) 25.20 (4)
𝑅𝑒𝑎𝑐𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛𝑠, V = = = 50.40KN
2 2
𝑉𝑢𝑑 = 50.40 − 25.20(0.430)
𝑉𝑢𝑑 = 39.56 𝐾𝑁
IF:
Using , = 0.35(√𝑓′𝑐)( )
𝑆 𝑓𝑦

Using, 𝑉𝑠 =
𝑆
P a g e |147
sSTUDIES
𝑉𝑐
0.17(1.0)(√20.7)(250)(430)
𝑉𝑐 =
1000
𝑉𝑐 = 83.15kN
⚫ ØVc = 0.75(83.15) = 62.36KN
⚫ 0.50ØVc = 0.50(0.75)(83.15) = 31.18KN
For 𝑥1 & 𝑥2 :
50.40 62.36 31.18
= = (1.85−𝑥
1.85 (1.85−𝑥1) 2)
𝑥1 = -457.32mm
𝑥2 = 696.34mm
Vud 39.56
Vn = = = 52.75KN
Ø 0.75
𝑉𝑠𝑟𝑒𝑞′𝑑 = Vn - Vc = 52.75 - 83.15 = -30.4KN


Use 𝑉𝑠𝑚𝑎𝑥 for the spacing for critical section for safety purposes
𝜋
𝐴𝑣 = 2{ (102 )} = 157.08𝑚𝑚2
4
𝐴𝑣(𝑓𝑦)(𝑑) 157.08(415)(430)
𝑆= =
𝑉𝑠 327.69(1000)
P a g e |148
Check for S(max)
sSTUDIES
0.33(1.0)(√20.7)(250)(430)
1000
𝑉𝑠𝑟𝑒𝑞′𝑑 = -17.14 kN < 161.40kN
𝑑 430
2 2
Spacing @ L = 2.5m
𝑊𝑢(𝐿𝑛) 25.20(2.5)
𝑅𝑒𝑎𝑐𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛𝑠 = = 31.5kN 2 2
𝑉𝑢 = 50.40 − 25.20(.430)
𝑉𝑢 = 39.56kN
𝐴𝑣 = 2 [𝜋 (102)] = 157.08 𝑚𝑚2

4
𝑉𝑐
0.17(1.0)(√20.7)(250)(430)
𝑉𝑐 =
1000
𝑉𝑐 = 83.15 KN
P a g e |149
sSTUDIES
𝑉𝑢
𝑉𝑠 = − 𝑉𝑐 ; Ø = 0.75
Ø
39.56
𝑉𝑠 = − 83.15 = -30.40kN
0.75
Check for S(max):
𝑉𝑠
0.33(1.0)(√20.7)(250)(430)
𝑉𝑠 = = 161.40kN
1000
Vs = -30.40 < 𝑉𝑠 = 161.40 KN
Use 𝑉𝑠𝑚𝑎𝑥:
157.08(415)(430)
𝑆= =
327.69(1000)
𝑉𝑠
𝑆 = 85.54mm (s𝑎𝑦 80mm)
Adopt Spacing of Stirrups @ 2.5 = 80mm o. c.
𝑑 430
Use spacing at the stirrups, 𝑆𝑚𝑎𝑥 =
2
= 2
= 215mm
Splice Distance (min)= 40(db) = 40(20) = 800 mm
Development Length (min) = 16(db) = 16(20) = 320mm

(Say 350 mm)
P a g e |150
4TH, 3RD , 2nd & GROUND FLOOR LEVEL
sSTUDIES
Live Load:
Classroom = 1.92kPa
Stair-case = 4.0kPa
Urinals = 2.0kPa
=11.75 + 1.0(factor of safety)
Live Load = 12.75kPa or 13kPa
Dead Load:
Slab
Weight of slab (0.125m x 23.56kN/𝑚 ) 3
= 3kPa
= 6.13kPa
Wall
Exterior wall (6”or150mm CHB,plastered both faces)
= 2.74kPa x 3.4m
= 9.32kN/m
Interior wall (4” CHB, plastered both faces)
= 2.11kPa x 3.4m
= 7.17kN/m
Dead Load = 22.62kN/m
P a g e |151
Longitudinal Beam Section
sSTUDIES
At Grid 4, 3 & 2 (considering interior span)
Span of 4.5 m
DL = 38.17kN/m
LL = 19.5kN/m
Factored load:
𝑊𝑢 = 1.2DL + 1.6LL = 1.2(38.17) + 1.6(19.5)
𝑊𝑢 = 77kN/m

Mumax = 0.90(20.7)(300)(600)2 (0.32037){1-0.59(0.32037)}
Mumax = 522.75kN-m
Using 50 mm Concrete Cover
main bars Ø
2
20
= 600 - 50 - - 10
2
d = 530mm
Left Support & Right Support:
1
11
1
= - (77)(4.5)2
11
Mu = -141.75kN-m
141.75 x 106
𝑏𝑑 2=
0.90(5.3782)
Assume d = 1.75b
141.75 x 106
b(1.75𝑏) =
2
0.90(5.3782)
3 6
29.285 𝑥 10
b= √
(1.75)2
b = 212.25mm say 300mm

d = 1.75(300) = 525mm say 600mm
ADOPT 300mm x 600mm
P a g e |152
𝐿 𝑓𝑦
Check; hmin = {0.40 +
sSTUDIES }
16 700
4500 415
= {0.40 + }
16 700
hmin = 279.24mm

❖Since Mu = 141.75kN-m < Mumax = 522.75kN-m …….Singly reinforced
Mu = Øf’cb𝑑 2 w(1-0.59w)
141.75x106 = 0.90(20.7)(300)(600)2 𝑤(1-0.59w)
w = 0.07365
𝑤𝑓′𝑐 (0.07365)(20.7)
𝜌= = = 0.00367
𝑓𝑦 415
Check for minimum steel ratio
1.4 1.4
𝜌min = = = 0.00337
𝑓𝑦 415
Since: 𝜌min = 0.00337 < 𝜌 = 0.00367
Use: 𝜌 = 0.00367
Area of Steel:
As = 𝜌bd
As = (0.00367) (300) (530)
As = 583.53mm2
No. of Steel:
583.53
n10 = 𝜋 = 1.86 say 4 bars
(20)2
4

300 = 2cc+2dt+2db+𝑆
300 = 2(50) + 2(10) + 2(20) + 𝑆
𝑆 = 140mm
P a g e |153
Midspan:
sSTUDIES
Mumax = 522.75kN-m
Wu = 77kN/m
1
16
1
= (77)(4.5)2
16
Mu = 97.45kN-m
Monolothic:
𝐿
b= = 4100
4 4
= 1,025mm --------adopt smallest
b = bw + 16t = 300 + 16(125) = 2,300mm
main bars Ø 20
d = h-concrete cover - - stirrups Ø = 600 - 50 - - 10
2 2
d = 530mm

a
𝑀𝑢 = Ø(0.85)(f’c)(a)(𝑏𝑓)(d − )
2
𝑎
97.45 x106 = 0.90(0.85)(20.7)(𝑎)(1025)(530 − )
2
a = 11.45mm
P a g e |154
sSTUDIES
T=C
As(fy) = 0.85(f’c)(a)(𝑏𝑓)
As(415) = 0.85(20.7)(11.45)(1025)
As = 497.59 mm2

1.4 1.4
;𝜌min = = = 0.00337
𝑓𝑦 415
𝐴𝑠𝑚𝑖𝑛 = (0.00337)(300)(530)
𝐴𝑠𝑚𝑖𝑛 = 535.83 mm2
No. of Steel:
𝐴𝑠
n=𝜋
(202)
4
535.83
(202 )
4
𝜋 2
𝐴𝑠𝑎𝑐𝑡𝑢𝑎𝑙 = (20 )(3) = 942.48 mm2
4

0.85(𝑓′𝑐)(𝛽)(600) 0.85(20.7)(0.85)(600)
;𝜌 b = =
𝑓𝑦(𝑓𝑦 + 600) 415(415 + 600)
𝜌b = 0.0213
𝐴𝑠𝑚𝑎𝑥 = 0.75(0.0213)(300)(530)

300 = 2cc+2dt+2db+𝑆
300 = 2(50) + 2(10) + 2(20) + 𝑆
𝑆 = 140mm
P a g e |155
sSTUDIES
@ Critical Section (d = 530 mm), L = 4.5m
𝑊𝑢 (𝐿𝑛) 77 (4)
𝑅𝑒𝑎𝑐𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛𝑠, V = = = 173.25KN
2 2
𝑉𝑢𝑑 = 173.25 − 77(0.530)
𝑉𝑢𝑑 = 132.44 𝐾𝑁
IF:
Using , = 0.35(√𝑓′𝑐)( )
𝑆 𝑓𝑦

Using, 𝑉𝑠 =
𝑆
P a g e |156
sSTUDIES
𝑉𝑐
0.17(1.0)(√20.7)(300)(530)
𝑉𝑐 =
1000
𝑉𝑐 = 122.98KN
⚫ ØVc = 0.75(122.98) = 92.24KN
⚫ 0.50ØVc = 0.50(0.75)(122.98) = 46.12KN
For 𝑥1 & 𝑥2 :
173.25 92.24 46.12
= =
2.05 (2.05−𝑥1 ) (2.05−𝑥2)
𝑥1 = 958.56mm
𝑥2 = 1,504.28mm
Vud 132.44
Vn = = = 176.59KN
Ø 0.75
𝑉𝑠𝑟𝑒𝑞′𝑑 = Vn - Vc = 176.59 - 122.98 = 53.61KN


𝜋
𝐴𝑣 = 2{ (102 )} = 157.08𝑚𝑚2
4
𝐴𝑣(𝑓𝑦)(𝑑) 157.08(415)(530)
𝑆= =
𝑉𝑠 484.68(1000)
P a g e |157
Check for S(max)
sSTUDIES
0.33(1.0)(√20.7)(300)(530)
1000
𝑉𝑠𝑟𝑒𝑞′𝑑 = 53.61 kN < 238.72kN
𝑑 530
2 2
Development Length (min) = 16(db) = 16(20) = 320 mm

(Say 350 mm)
P a g e |158
TRANSVERSE BEAM
sSTUDIES
AT GRID A, B, C, D, E, F, G, H,& I (considering interior span)
Span of 4m
Total load:
DL = 34.37kN/m
LL = 17.33kN/m
Factored load:
𝑊𝑢 = 1.2DL + 1.6LL = 1.2(34.37) + 1.6(17.33)
𝑊𝑢 = 68.97kN/m
Mumax = 0.90(20.7)(300)(600)2 (0.32037){1-0.59(0.32037)}
Mumax = 522.76kN-m
@ Left Support and Right Support

1
11
1
= - (68.97)(4)2
11
Mu = -100.32kN-m
100.32 x 106
𝑏𝑑 2=
0.90(5.3782)
Assume d = 1.75b
100.32 x 106
b(1.75𝑏)2 =
0.90(5.3782)
3 6
20.726 x 10
b= √
(1.75)2
b = 189.15mm say 300mm

d = 1.75(300) = 525mm say 600mm
ADOPT 300mm x 600mm
P a g e |159
main bars Ø
= h-concrete cover -
dsSTUDIES - stirrups Ø
2
20Ø
= 600 - 50 - 2 - 10
d = 530mm
𝐿 𝑓𝑦
Check; hmin = {0.40 + }
16 700
4500 415
= {0.40 + }
16 700
hmin = 279.24mm

❖Since Mu = -100.32kN-m < Mumax = 522.76kN-m …….Singly reinforced
Mu = Øf’cb𝑑 2 w(1-0.59w)
100.32x106 = 0.90(20.7)(300)(600)2 𝑤(1-0.59w)
w = 0.05142
𝑤𝑓′𝑐 (0.05142)(20.7)
𝜌= = = 0.00256
𝑓𝑦 415
Check for minimum steel ratio
1.4 1.4
𝜌min = = = 0.00337
𝑓𝑦 415
Since: 𝜌 = 0.00251 < 𝜌min = 0.00337
Use: 𝜌min = 0.00337
Area of Steel:
As = 𝜌minbd
As = (0.00337) (300) (530)
As = 535.83mm2

No. of Steel:
535.83
n12 = 𝜋 = 1.71 say 4 bars
4
(202)
300 = 2cc+2dt+2db+𝑆
300 = 2(50) + 2(10) + 2(20) + 𝑆
𝑆 = 140mm
P a g e |160
@sSTUDIES
Midspan
Mumax = 522.76kN-m
Wu = 68.97kN/m
1
16
1
= (68.97)(4)2
16
Mu = 68.97kN-m
Monolothic:
𝐿
b= = 3600
4 4
b = bw + 16t = 300 + 16(125) = 2,300mm
main bars Ø 20
d = h-concrete cover - - stirrups Ø = 600 - 50 - - 10
2 2
d = 530mm

a
𝑀𝑢 = Ø(0.85)(f’c)(a)(𝑏𝑓)(d − )
2
𝑎
68.97 x106 = 0.90(0.85)(20.7)(𝑎)(900)(530 − )
2
a = 9.21mm
P a g e |161
sSTUDIES
T=C
As(fy) = 0.85(f’c)(a)(𝑏𝑓)
As(415) = 0.85(20.7)(9.21)(900)
As = 351.43 mm2

1.4 1.4
;𝜌min = = = 0.00337
𝑓𝑦 415
𝐴𝑠𝑚𝑖𝑛 = (0.00337)(300)(530)
𝐴𝑠𝑚𝑖𝑛 = 535.83 mm2
No. of Steel:
𝐴𝑠
n=𝜋
(202)
4
535.83
(202 )
4
𝜋 2
𝐴𝑠𝑎𝑐𝑡𝑢𝑎𝑙 = (20 )(3) = 942.48 mm2
4

0.85(𝑓′𝑐)(𝛽)(600) 0.85(20.7)(0.85)(600)
;𝜌 b = =
𝑓𝑦(𝑓𝑦 + 600) 415(415 + 600)
𝜌b = 0.0213
𝐴𝑠𝑚𝑎𝑥 = 0.75(0.0213)(300)(530)

300 = 2cc+2dt+2db+𝑆
300 = 2(50) + 2(10) + 2(20) + 𝑆
𝑆 = 140mm

@ Critical Section (d = 530 mm), L = 4m
P a g e |162
𝑊𝑢 (𝐿𝑛) 68.97 (4)
𝑅𝑒𝑎𝑐𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛𝑠,
sSTUDIES V= = = 137.94KN
2 2
𝑉𝑢𝑑 = 137.94 − 68.97(0.530)
𝑉𝑢𝑑 = 101.36 𝐾𝑁
IF:
Using , = 0.35(√𝑓′𝑐)( )
𝑆 𝑓𝑦
Using, 𝑉𝑠 =
𝑆
𝑉𝑐
0.17(1.0)(√20.7)(300)(530)
𝑉𝑐 =
1000
𝑉𝑐 = 122.98KN
⚫ ØVc = 0.75(122.98) = 92.24KN
⚫ 0.50ØVc = 0.50(0.75)(122.98) = 46.12KN
P a g e |163
For 𝑥1 & 𝑥2 :
sSTUDIES
137.94 92.24 46.12
= =
1.8 (1.8−𝑥1) (1.8−𝑥2)
𝑥1 = 596.35mm
𝑥2 = 1,198.17mm
Vud 101.36
Vn = = = 135.15KN
Ø 0.75
𝑉𝑠𝑟𝑒𝑞′𝑑 = Vn - Vc = 135.15 - 122.98 = 12.17KN


𝜋
𝐴𝑣 = 2{ (102 )} = 157.08𝑚𝑚2
4
𝐴𝑣(𝑓𝑦)(𝑑) 157.08(415)(530)
𝑆= =
𝑉𝑠 484.68(1000)
Check for S(max)
P a g e |164
sSTUDIES
0.33(1.0)(√20.7)(300)(530)
1000
𝑉𝑠𝑟𝑒𝑞′𝑑 = 53.61 kN < 238.72kN
𝑑 530
2 2
Development Length (min) = 16(db) = 16(20) = 320 mm

(Say 350 mm)
P a g e |165
sSTUDIES
TYPICAL BEAM DETAILS
P a g e |166
Figure 11:Typical Beam Details
sSTUDIES
BEAM SECTIONS
Roof Deck Beam Section
4th, 3rd, 2nd, and Ground Floor Beam Section
Figure 12:Beam Section
NOTES:
1. No splice shall be made at distance 2H from face of the support.
2. Bottom bars shall be spliced within L/4 but not less than 2H from face
of the support.
3. Top bars can be spliced anywhere beyond 2H from the face of the support.
4. Hoops shall be used within the distance 2H from face of the support.
5. Hoops lesser than (D/4 and 100mm) shall be used within the spliced
length.
6. Stirrups with seismic hook can be used beyond 2H.
P a g e |167
sSTUDIES
Figure 13:Schedule of reinforced Concrete beam

P a g e |168
Appendix H
sSTUDIES
COLUMN DESIGN
Unit weight of Conc. = 23.56kN/𝑚3

Yeild Strength, fy = 415 Mpa (grade 60)
Modulus of Elasticity for concrete, = 200,000.00 MPa
Concrete cover = 50mm (NSCP min. Cc = 40mm)
P a g e |169
sSTUDIES
2𝑃𝑢
Ag = ; 𝛼 = 0.80
𝛼∅{0.85𝑓′𝑐(1−𝜌𝑔) + 𝜌𝑔𝑓𝑦}
∅ = 0.65
steel ratio, 𝜌𝑔 = 0.01 to 0.08
Assume: steel ratio, 𝜌𝑔 = 0.02
4TH FLOOR COLUMN

P a g e |170
sSTUDIES
CONSIDERING COLUMN 3 (C3)
4.5000
4.0000
Tributary Area = 4.5 x 4 = 18𝑚2

(According to NSCP 2015, Section 207.5.12.1.3 greater than 65𝑚2
DEAD LOAD:
Ceiling 0.104(18) =1.87kN
Plumbing, electrical 1.50(18) =27kN
Wt. of beam 23.56(4.5)(0.25 x 0.50) =13.25kN
23.56(4)(0.25 x 0.50) =11.78kN
Wt. of slab (23.56 x 0.125)(18) =53.01kN
Parapet wall (2.63 + 2(0.24))(1.5)(18) =83.97kN
DL = 218.42kN
LIVE LOAD:
LL = 2.90(18) = 52.2kN
Factored load:
𝑃𝑢4 = 1.2DL + 1.6LL = 1.2(218.62) + 1.6(52.2)
𝑃𝑢4 = 345.62kN
(𝑃𝑢)
Ag =
(𝛼)(∅){0.85𝑓′𝑐(1−𝜌𝑔) + 𝜌𝑔𝑓𝑦}
(345.62 x 103 )
Ag =
(0.80)(0.65){(0.85)(20.7)(1−0.02) + (0.02)(415)}
Ag = √26020.88𝑚𝑚2
b = 161.31mm
Say: 𝐶14 = 300mm
USE : 300mm x 300mm
P a g e |171
Ag = 300 x 300 = 90,000𝑚𝑚2
sSTUDIES
Area of Steel, As:
𝐴𝑠 = 𝜌𝑔 = 0.02(90000) = 1,800𝑚𝑚2
Using ∅20mm:
𝜋
A = (20)2 = 314.16𝑚𝑚2
4
𝐴𝑠 1800
n= = = 5.73 say 6 bars
𝐴𝑏 314.16
Using ∅25mm:
𝜋
A = (25)2 = 490.87𝑚𝑚2
4
𝐴𝑠 1800
n= = = 3.66 say 4 bars
𝐴𝑏 490.87
Use 4-∅25mm
𝜋
𝐴𝑠𝑎𝑐𝑡𝑢𝑎𝑙 = (25)2(6) = 1,963.50𝑚𝑚2
4
Check:
𝐴𝑠𝑎𝑐𝑡𝑢𝑎𝑙 1963.50
𝜌𝑔 = = = 0.02
𝐴𝑔 300 𝑥 300
Since; 𝜌𝑔 = 0.03 > 0.02 < 0.08 ------(ok)
𝑃𝑢 = 𝛼∅{0.85𝑓′𝑐(𝑏2 − 𝐴𝑠) + 𝐴𝑠𝑓𝑦}

= (0.80)(0.65){0.85(20.7)(3002 − 1963.50) + (1963.50)(415)}
𝑃𝑢cap = 1,229.20kN
Since; 𝑃𝑢cap = 1,229.20kN > 𝑃𝑢𝑎𝑐𝑡𝑢𝑎𝑙 = 344.4kN----(safe)
Figure 14:Section 3-3 (c2)

P a g e |172
From the NSCP (Section 425.7.2, NSCP 2015)
sSTUDIES
Spacing of ties center to center (using ∅𝑡 =10mm):
S = 16(longitudinal bar) = 16(∅25mm) = 400mm
S = 48(lateral tie) = 48(∅𝑡 =10mm) = 480mm
S = least dimension = 300mm --------Adopt
Check for Main Reinforcement Bar Spacing if need Lateral Support
S ≤ 150mm
300=2(cc) + 2(lateral tie) + 3(size of bar reinforcement) + 2S
300=2(50) + 2(10) + 3(25) + 2S
S = 52.5mm say 50mm < 150mm ------only lateral ties needed
1 1
S1 = x min. column dimension = (300) = 75mm
4 4
S2 = 6 x dia. Of the smallest main rebar = 6(25) = 150mm

100 + (350−hx) 100 + (350−180)
S3 = = = 90mm
3 3
hx = h – 2(cc)-2(dt)
hx = 300 – 2(50)-2(10) = 180
P a g e |173
sSTUDIES
Splicing (Section 425.5, NSCP 2015)
Splice Distance (min)=40(db)

Splice Distance (min)=40(25)
Splice Distance (min)=1000mm
Ties @ 3-50mm , 4-100mm rest @ 150mm
3RD & 2ND FLOOR COLUMN
For C2 (GRID 4, 3, & 2)

DEAD LOAD:
Ceiling 0.104(18) = 1.872kN
Wt. of Slab (23.56 x 0.125)(18) = 53.01kN
Wt. of column
C1 23.56(2.8)(0.30 x 0.30) = 5.94kN
Wt. of beam: 23.56(4.5)(0.30 x 0.60) = 19.08kN
23.56(4)(0.30 x 0.60) = 16.96kN
DL = 201.62kN
P a g e |174
LIVE LOAD:
sSTUDIES
Classroom , LL 1.92(18) = 34.56kN
LL = 142.56kN
Factored load:
𝑃𝑢3 = 1.2DL + 1.6LL = 1.2(201.62) + 1.6(142.56) = 470.04kN
𝑃𝑢3 = 470.04kN + 𝑃𝑢4 = 345.62kN
𝑃𝑢3 = 815.66kN
(𝑃𝑢)
Ag =
(𝛼)(∅){0.85𝑓′𝑐(1−𝜌𝑔) + 𝜌𝑔𝑓𝑦}
(815.66 x 103 )
Ag =
(0.80)(0.65){(0.85)(20.7)(1−0.02) + (0.02)(415)}
Ag = √61409.03𝑚𝑚
b = 247.81mm
Say: 𝐶13 = 300mm
USE : 400mm x 400mm
Ag = 400 x400 = 160,000𝑚𝑚2
Area of Steel, As:

𝐴𝑠 = 𝜌𝑔 = 0.02(160000) = 3,200𝑚𝑚2
Using ∅20mm:
𝜋
A = (20)2 = 314.16𝑚𝑚2
4
𝐴𝑠 3200
n= = = 10.19 say 12 bars
𝐴𝑏 314.16
Using ∅25mm:
𝜋
A = (25)2 = 490.87𝑚𝑚2
4
𝐴𝑠 3200
n= = = 6.52 say 8 bars
𝐴𝑏 490.87
Use 8-∅25mm
𝜋
𝐴𝑠𝑎𝑐𝑡𝑢𝑎𝑙 = (25)2(8) = 3,926.99𝑚𝑚2
4
P a g e |175
Check:
sSTUDIES 𝐴𝑠𝑎𝑐𝑡𝑢𝑎𝑙 3926.99
𝜌𝑔 = 𝐴𝑔 = = 0.025
400 𝑥 400
Since; 𝜌𝑔 = 0.03 > 0.025 < 0.08 ------(ok)
𝑃𝑢 = 𝛼∅{0.85𝑓′𝑐(𝑏2 − 𝐴𝑠) + 𝐴𝑠𝑓𝑦}

= (0.80)(0.65){0.85(20.7)(4002 − 3926.99) + (3926.99)(415)}
𝑃𝑢cap = 2,275.42kN
Since; 𝑃𝑢cap = 2,275.42kN > 𝑃𝑢𝑎𝑐𝑡𝑢𝑎𝑙 = 1,487.06kN----(safe)
Spacing of ties (using ∅𝑡 =10mm):

S = 16(longitudinal bar) = 16(∅25mm) = 400mm -------Adopt
S= 400mm
S ≤ 150mm
400=2(50) + 2(10) + 3(25) + 2S

S = 102.5mm say 100mm < 150mm ----only lateral ties needed
P a g e |176
sSTUDIES
1 1
4 4

100 + (350−hx) 100 + (350−280)
S3 = = = 56.67mm
3 3
hx = h – 2(cc)-2(dt)
hx = 400 – 2(50)-2(10) = 280

Ties @ 3-50mm , 4-100mm rest @ 150mm

P a g e |177
GROUND FLOOR COLUMN & COLUMN FOOTING
sSTUDIES
For C1 (GRID 4, 3, & 2)
DEAD LOAD:
Ceiling 0.104(18) = 1.872kN
Wt. of Slab (23.56 x 0.125)(18) = 53.01kN
Wt. of column
C1 23.56(2.8)(0.40 x 0.40) = 10.55kN
Wt. of beam: 23.56(4.5)(0.30 x 0.60) = 19.08kN
23.56(4)(0.30 x 0.60) = 16.96kN
DL = 206.23kN
LIVE LOAD:
Classroom , LL 1.92(18) = 34.56kN
LL = 142.56kN
Factored load:
𝑃𝑢1 = 1.2DL + 1.6LL = 1.2(206.23) + 1.6(142.56) = 475.57kN
𝑃𝑢1 = 475.57kN +𝑃𝑢2
𝑃𝑢1 = 1,766.8kN
P a g e |178
(𝑃𝑢)
Ag =
sSTUDIES
(𝛼)(∅){0.85𝑓′𝑐(1−𝜌𝑔) + 𝜌𝑔𝑓𝑦}
(1766.8 x 103 )
Ag =
(0.80)(0.65){(0.85)(20.7)(1−0.02) + (0.02)(415)}
Ag = √133018.01𝑚𝑚
b = 364.72mm
Say: C1 = 500mm
USE : 500mm x 500mm
Ag = 500 x500 = 250,000𝑚𝑚2

Area of Steel, As:
𝐴𝑠 = 𝜌𝑔 = 0.02(250000) = 5,000𝑚𝑚2
Using ∅20mm:
𝜋
A = (20)2 = 314.16𝑚𝑚2
4
𝐴𝑠 5000
n= = = 15.92 say 16 bars
𝐴𝑏 314.16
Using ∅25mm:
𝜋
A = (25)2 = 490.87𝑚𝑚2
4
𝐴𝑠 5000
n= = = 10.19 say 12 bars
𝐴𝑏 490.87
Use 12-∅25mm
𝜋
𝐴𝑠𝑎𝑐𝑡𝑢𝑎𝑙 = (25)2(12) = 5,890.49𝑚𝑚2
4
Check:
𝐴𝑠 5890.49
𝜌𝑔 = 𝑎𝑐𝑡𝑢𝑎𝑙 = = 0.024
𝐴𝑔 500 𝑥 500
Since; 𝜌𝑔 = 0.03 ≥ 0.024 < 0.08 ------(ok)
𝑃𝑢 = 𝛼∅{0.85𝑓′𝑐(𝑏2 − 𝐴𝑠) + 𝐴𝑠𝑓𝑦}

= (0.80)(0.65){0.85(20.7)(5002 − 5890.49) + (5890.49)(415)}
𝑃𝑢cap = 3,504.62kN
Since; 𝑃𝑢cap = 3,504.62kN > 𝑃𝑢𝑎𝑐𝑡𝑢𝑎𝑙 = 2,637.1kN----(safe)

S= 500mm
P a g e |179
sSTUDIES
S ≤ 150mm
400=2(50) + 2(10) + 3(25) + 2S

S = 102.5mm say 100mm < 150mm -------only lateral ties needed
1 1
S1 = x min. column dimension = (500) = 125mm say 100mm
4 4

100 + (350−hx) 100 + (350−280)
S3 = = = 56.67mm
3 3
hx = h – 2(cc)-2(dt)
hx = 400 – 2(50)-2(10) = 280

P a g e |180
sSTUDIES
Ties @ 3-50mm , 4-100mm rest @ 150mm
At C3 (Grid 1- Hallway)- 3rd to Ground Floor level
DEAD LOAD = 100.76kN (from preliminary sizing)

LIVE LOAD = 48.58kN (from preliminary sizing)
Factored load:
𝑃𝑢3,2,1 = 1.2DL + 1.6LL = 1.2(100.76) + 1.6(48.58)
𝑃𝑢3,2,1 = 198.64kN + 91.92kN = 290.56kN
(𝑃𝑢)
Ag = ;use steel ratio, 𝜌𝑔 = 0.03 (3％)
(𝛼)(∅){0.85𝑓′𝑐(1−𝜌𝑔) + 𝜌𝑔𝑓𝑦}
P a g e |181
(290.56 x 103 )
Ag =
sSTUDIES
(0.80)(0.65){(0.85)(20.7)(1−0.03) + (0.03)(415)}
Ag = √1𝑚𝑚2
b = 147.90mm
Say: C3 = 300mm
USE : 300mm x 300mm
Ag = 300 x300 = 90,000𝑚𝑚2

Area of Steel, As:
𝐴𝑠 = 𝜌𝑔 = 0.03(90000) = 2,700𝑚𝑚2
Using ∅25mm:
𝜋
A = (25)2 = 490.87𝑚𝑚2
4
𝐴𝑠 2700
n= = = 5.50 say 6 bars
𝐴𝑏 490.87
Use 6- ∅25mm
𝜋
𝐴𝑠𝑎𝑐𝑡𝑢𝑎𝑙 = (25)2(6) = 2,945.24𝑚𝑚2
4
Check:
𝐴𝑠𝑎𝑐𝑡𝑢𝑎𝑙 2945.24
𝜌𝑔 = = = 0.022
𝐴𝑔 300 𝑥 300
Since; 𝜌𝑔 = 0.03 ≥ 0.03 < 0.08 ------(ok)
𝑃𝑢 = 𝛼∅{0.85𝑓′𝑐(𝑏2 − 𝐴𝑠) + 𝐴𝑠𝑓𝑦}

= (0.80)(0.65){0.85(20.7)(3002 − 2945.24) + (2945.24)(415)}
𝑃𝑢cap = 1,432.08kN
Since; 𝑃𝑢cap = 1,432.08kN > 𝑃𝑢𝑎𝑐𝑡𝑢𝑎𝑙 ----(safe)

S= 300mm
S ≤ 150mm
300=2(50) + 2(10) + 3(25) + 2S
P a g e |182
sSTUDIES1 1
4 4

100 + (350−hx) 100 + (350−180)
S3 = = = 90mm
3 3
hx = h – 2(cc)-2(dt)
hx = 300 – 2(50)-2(10) = 180

Ties @ 3-50mm , 5-100mm rest @ 150mm
Standard Hook for Ties
Using 135-degree hook

P a g e |183
Minimum inside bend diameter=4(db) = 4(10) = 40mm
sSTUDIES
Straight extension length =4(db) =4(10) = 40mm
Development of Reinforcement (Section 425.4, NSCP 2015)
Development Length (min)=16(db) = 16(25) = 400mm
At C3 (Grid 1- Hallway)- Footing to Ground Floor level
DEAD LOAD = 100.76kN (from preliminary sizing)

LIVE LOAD = 48.58kN (from preliminary sizing)
Factored load:
𝑃𝑢1 = 1.2DL + 1.6LL = 1.2(100.76) + 1.6(48.58)
𝑃𝑢1 = 198.64kN + 290.56kN = 489.2kN
(𝑃𝑢)
Ag = ;use steel ratio, 𝜌𝑔 = 0.04 (4％)
(𝛼)(∅){0.85𝑓′𝑐(1−𝜌𝑔) + 𝜌𝑔𝑓𝑦}
(489.2 x 103 )
Ag =
(0.80)(0.65){(0.85)(20.7)(1−0.02) + (0.02)(415)}
Ag = √28090.04
b = 167.60mm
Say: C3 = 300mm
USE : 300mm x 300mm
Ag = 300 x300 = 90,000𝑚𝑚2

Area of Steel, As:
𝐴𝑠 = 𝜌𝑔 = 0.04(90000) = 3,600𝑚𝑚2
Using ∅25mm:
𝜋
A = (25)2 = 490.87𝑚𝑚2
4
𝐴𝑠 3600
n= = = 7.33 say 8 bars
𝐴𝑏 490.87
Use 8- ∅25mm
𝜋
𝐴𝑠𝑎𝑐𝑡𝑢𝑎𝑙 = (25)2(8) = 3,927𝑚𝑚2
4
P a g e |184
Check:
sSTUDIES 𝐴𝑠𝑎𝑐𝑡𝑢𝑎𝑙 3927
𝜌𝑔 = 𝐴𝑔 = = 0.0
300 𝑥 300
Since; 𝜌𝑔 = 0.03 < 0.04 < 0.08 ------(ok)
𝑃𝑢 = 𝛼∅{0.85𝑓′𝑐(𝑏2 − 𝐴𝑠) + 𝐴𝑠𝑓𝑦}

= (0.80)(0.65){0.85(20.7)(3002 − 3927) + (3927)(415)}
𝑃𝑢cap = 1,634.96kN
Since; 𝑃𝑢cap = 1,229.20kN > 𝑃𝑢𝑎𝑐𝑡𝑢𝑎𝑙 ----(safe)

S= 300mm
S ≤ 150mm
300=2(50) + 2(10) + 3(25) + 2S
1 1
4 4

100 + (350−hx) 100 + (350−180)
S3 = = = 90mm
3 3
hx = h – 2(cc)-2(dt)
hx = 300 – 2(50)-2(10) = 180
Ties @ 3-50mm , 5-100mm rest @ 150mm

P a g e |185
COLUMN ELEVATION
sSTUDIES
Figure 15:Column Elevation

P a g e |186
COLUMN SCHEDULE
sSTUDIES
Table 8:Column Schedule

P a g e |187
Appendix I
sSTUDIES
FOOTING DESIGN
Plan
Table 420.6.1.3.2
Specified Concrete Cover Cast in Place Prestressed Concrete Members
P a g e |188
sSTUDIES
Table 305 – 1 (Minimum Requirements for Foundation)
Table 425.3.1
Standard hook Geometry for Development of Deformed Bars in Tension
Table 421 (Strength Reduction Factor)

P a g e |189
Footing I:
sSTUDIES
Column dimensions = 0.50m x 0.50m
Allowable bearing capacity = 196kN/𝑚2
DL = 823.5 kN
LL = 479.88 kN
𝑓𝑐 ′ = 20.7 MPa
𝑓𝑦 = 415 𝑀𝑝𝑎
𝑦𝑠𝑜𝑖𝑙 = 17 kN/
𝑦𝑐𝑜𝑛𝑐𝑟𝑒𝑡𝑒 = 23.56 kN/
Assume total depth of footing:
D= 600 mm
Using 75 mm concrete cover,
D= 600 – 75 = 525 mm
Effective soil pressure,
𝑞𝑒𝑓𝑓 = 196 - 0.60(23.56) – 17(2.00-0.60)
𝑞𝑒𝑓𝑓 = 158.06 kPa
𝐷𝐿+𝐿𝐿
Required area =
𝑞𝑒𝑓𝑓
823.5 +479.88
𝐿2 = = 8.25 𝑚2
158.06
L= √8.25 = 2.87 m say 3.00 m
Net ultimate soil pressure

𝑝𝑢
𝑞𝑢 = 𝐴
; 𝑝𝑢 = 1.2DL + 1.6LL
= 1.2(823.5) + 1.6 (479.88) =1756.01 KN

1756.01
𝑞𝑢 = = 195.11 kPa
3.002
195.11 kPa > 158.06 kPa (OK)

P a g e |190
Check “d” from Punching Shear
sSTUDIES
1
𝑉𝑐 = 3 √𝑓𝑐′
1
𝑉𝑐 = √20.7 = 1.517
3
Actual Punching Shear

𝑉𝑢
V= ; V= 𝑉𝑐
øbd
1 𝑉𝑢
√𝑓𝑐′ =
3 øbd
ø √𝑓𝑐′ b d
𝑉𝑢 = ; ø = 0.75
3
𝑏𝑜 = 4 (c + d) = 4 (0.50 + 0.525) = 4.1 m
𝑉𝑢 = qu ((𝐿)2 - (c + d) 2 )
𝑉𝑢 = 195.11 ((3.0)2 - (0.50 + 0.525) 2 )
𝑉𝑢 = 1551 kN = 1.544 MN
0.75√20.7 (4.1) (d)

1.544 =
3
d= 0.333 m = 333 mm < 525 mm (ok!)
Check “d” from beam shear

1
𝑉𝑐 = √𝑓𝑐′ (critical shear)
6
P a g e |191
sSTUDIES
Actual Beam Shear
𝑉𝑢
V= ; V = 𝑉𝑐
øbd
1 𝑉𝑢
√𝑓𝑐′ =
6 øbd
𝑉𝑢 = 6
𝑉𝑢 = qu 𝑦 L
3.0−0.50
𝑦= – 0.525 = 0.725mm
2
X = 3.0-(0.725+0.525) = 1.75 mm
𝑉𝑢 = 195.11 (0.525) (3.0) = 307.30 KN = 0.30730 MN
0.75 √20.7 (3.0) 𝑑

0.30730 =
6
d= 0.180 m = 180 mm < 525mm (OK!)
Use 3.0m x 3.0m x 0.60m Square Footing
Required Steel Area
Mu = ø 𝑓𝑐′ 𝑏 𝑑2 w (1-0.59w) ; ø = 0.90

1
Mu= 𝑞𝑢 L X ( 𝑥)
2
1
Mu= 195.11 (3.0) (1.75) [ (1.75)] = 898.68 KN-m
2
898.68 = 0.90 (20.7𝑥103 ) (3.0) (0.525)2 𝑤 (1-0.59w)
w= 0.06050
w 𝑓𝑐 ′ 0.06050 (20.7)
𝜌= = = 0.00302
fy 415
1.4 1.4
𝜌𝑚𝑖𝑛 = = = 0.00337
fy 415
1.4
𝜌= 0.00228 < = 0.00337
415
Use 𝜌𝑚𝑖𝑛 = 0.00337
𝐴𝑠 = 𝜌 𝑏 𝑑 = 0.00337 (3000)(525) = 5,307.75 𝑚𝑚2
P a g e |192
sSTUDIES
Using 25 mm ø bars ( 490.87 mm²)
5307.75
N= = 10.81 say 11 bars
490.87
Check for Development Length

cc = 75mm (concrete cover)
K𝑡𝑟 = 0 (no stirrups)
a= 1.3 (reinforcement location factor)
𝑦 = 1.0 (reinforcement size factor)
β = 1.0 (coating factor)
λ = 1.0 (normal weight concrete is used)
Furnished 𝐿𝑑 = 1250 – 75 = 1175 mm
Req’d 𝑳𝒅
𝐿𝑑 9 fy a β 𝑦 𝜆
= cc+ K𝑡𝑟
𝑑𝑏 (10√20.7)( )
𝑑𝑏
cc+ K𝑡𝑟 75+0

; = = 3 > 2.5
𝑑𝑏 25
Therefore, Use 2.5
𝐿𝑑 9 (415)(1.3)(1.0)(1.0)(1.0)
𝑑𝑏
= (10√20.7)(2.5)
= 42.69
𝐿𝑑 = 42.69 (25) = 1067.25 mm < 1250 (OK!)

P a g e |193
sSTUDIES
Design Detail
Figure 16:footing 1 Design details

P a g e |194
Footing II:
sSTUDIES
Column dimensions = 0.30 x 0.30m

Allowable bearing capacity=196kN/𝑚2
DL = 357.11 kN
LL = 162.07 kN
𝑓𝑐 ′ = 20.7 MPa
𝑓𝑦 = 415 𝑀𝑝𝑎
𝑦𝑠𝑜𝑖𝑙 = 17 kN/
𝑦𝑐𝑜𝑛𝑐𝑟𝑒𝑡𝑒 = 23.56 kN/
Assume total depth of footing:
D= 400 mm
Using 75 mm concrete cover,
D= 400 – 75 = 325 mm
Effective soil pressure,
𝑞𝑒𝑓𝑓 = 196 - 0.40(23.56) – 17(2.00-0.40)
𝑞𝑒𝑓𝑓 = 159.03 kPa
𝐷𝐿+𝐿𝐿
Required area =
𝑞𝑒𝑓𝑓
357.11 +162.07
𝐿2 = = 3.26 𝑚2
159.03
L= √3.26 = 1.81 m say 2.20 m
Net ultimate soil pressure

𝑝𝑢
𝑞𝑢 = 𝐴
; 𝑝𝑢 = 1.2DL + 1.6LL
= 1.2(357.11) + 1.6 (162.07 ) = 687.84 KN

687.84
𝑞𝑢 = = 171.96 kPa
2.02
171.96 kPa > 159.03 kPa (OK)

P a g e |195
sSTUDIES
Check “d” from punching shear
1
𝑉𝑐 = √𝑓𝑐′
3
1
𝑉𝑐 = √20.7 = 1.517
3
Actual punching shear

𝑉𝑢
V= ; V = 𝑉𝑐
øbd
1 𝑉𝑢
√𝑓𝑐′ =
3 øbd
𝑉𝑢 = ; ø = 0.75
3
𝑏𝑜 = 4 (c + d) = 4 (0.30 + 0.325) = 2.5 m
𝑉𝑢 = qu ((𝐿)2 - (c + d) 2 )
𝑉𝑢 = 171.96 [(2.0)2 - (0.30 + 0.325) 2 ]
𝑉𝑢 = 620.67 Kn = 0.62067 MN
0.75√20.7 (2.9) (d)
0.62067 =
3
d= 0.188 m =188 mm < 325 mm (ok!)

P a g e |196
sSTUDIES
Check “d” from beam shear
1
𝑉𝑐 = √𝑓𝑐′ (critical shear)
6
Actual beam shear

𝑉𝑢
V= ; V = 𝑉𝑐
øbd
1 𝑉𝑢
√𝑓𝑐′ =
6 øbd
𝑉𝑢 = 6
𝑉𝑢 = qu 𝑦 L
2.0−0.30
𝑦= – 0.325 = 0.525mm
2
X = 2.0-(0.525+0.325) = 1.15 mm
𝑉𝑢 = 171.96 (0.525) (2.0) = 180.56 KN = 0.18056 MN
0.75 √20.7 (2.0) 𝑑

0.18056 =
6
d= 0.159 m = 159 mm < 325mm (OK!)
Use 2.0m x 2.0m x 0.40m Square Footing
Required steel Area

Mu = ø 𝑓𝑐′ 𝑏 𝑑2 w (1-0.59w) ; ø = 0.90
1
Mu= 𝑞𝑢 L X ( 𝑥)
2
1
Mu= 171.96 (2.0) (1.15) ( 1.15) = 227.42
2
227.42 = 0.90 (20.7𝑥103 ) (2.0) (0.325)2 𝑤 (1-0.59w)
w= 0.05990
′
w 𝑓𝑐
1.4
𝜌= < 𝜌𝑚𝑖𝑛 =
fy fy
P a g e |197
0.05990 (20.7)
=
𝜌sSTUDIES = 0.00299 <
1.4
= 0.00337
415 415
Use 𝜌𝑚𝑖𝑛 = 0.00337

𝐴𝑠 = 𝜌 𝑏 𝑑 = 0.00337 (2000)(325) = 2190.5 𝑚𝑚2
Using 16 mm ø bars ( 490.87 mm²)

2190.5
N= = 10.89 say 11 bars
201.06
Check for development length
; c = 75mm (concrete cover)

K𝑡𝑟 = 0 (no stirrups)
a= 1.3 (reinforcement location factor)
𝑦 = 1.0 (reinforcement size factor)
β = 1.0 (coating factor)
λ = 1.0 (normal weight concrete is used)
Furnished 𝐿𝑑 = 850 – 75 = 775 mm
Req’d 𝑳𝒅
𝐿𝑑 9 fy a β 𝑦 𝜆
= c+ K𝑡𝑟
𝑑𝑏 (10√20.7)( )
𝑑𝑏
c+ K𝑡𝑟 75+0
;
𝑑𝑏
= 25
= 3 > 2.5
Therefore, Use 2.5

𝐿𝑑 9 (415)(1.3)(1.0)(1.0)(1.0)
= = 42.69
𝑑𝑏 (10√20.7)(2.5)
𝐿𝑑 = 42.69 (16) = 683.04 mm < 775 (OK!)

P a g e |198
sSTUDIES
Design Detail
Figure 17:footing 2 Design details
Footing Schedule
P a g e |199
Appendix J
sSTUDIES
ESTIMATIONS ESTIMATION FOR CONSTRUCTION OF FOUR-STOREY SCHOOL BUILDING
NAME OF PROJECT: STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS OF OF PROPOSED FOUR-STOREY SCHOOL BUILDING
LOCATION: VIRAC INTEGRATED SCHOOL, ITOGON BENGUET
ITEM NO. DESCRIPTION QTY UNIT UNIT COST MATERIAL COST

A.1 foundation
Reinforcement
footing 1
25 mm reinforcement bar (grade 60) 351 pcs 807 283,257.00
# 16 Tie wire 34.5 kgs 90 3,105.00
footing 2
25 mm reinforcement bar(grade 60) 30 pcs 807 24,210.00
# 16 Tie wire 1.7 kgs 90 153.00
Column 1
25 mm reinforcement bar (grade 60) @ 6m 216 pcs 807 174,312.00
10 mm Lateral ties (grade 60) @ 6m 317 pcs 180 57,060.00
# 16 Tie wire 22.7 kgs 90 2,043.00
Column 2
# 16 Tie wire 7.6 kgs 90 684.00
A.2 CONCRETE Ready-mix concrete (6000 psi)
footing 184.5 cu.m 6000 1,107,000.00
column 18.91 cu.m 6000 113,460.00
TOTAL 1,805,496.00
B.1 ground to second level
Reinforcement
Column 1
# 16 Tie wire 28.2 kgs 90 2,538.00
Column 2
# 16 Tie wire 9.4 kgs 90 846.00
B.2 Tie beam
Tie beam 1.1
# 16 Tie wire 40.8 kgs 90 3,672.00
Tie beam 1.2
# 16 Tie wire 40.8 kgs 90 3,672.00
B.3 Slab
slab 1
# 16 Tie wire 42 kgs 90 3,780.00
slab 2
# 16 Tie wire 14 kgs 90 1,260.00
B.4 Beam
beam 1
# 16 Tie wire 40.8 kgs 90 3,672.00
Beam 2
# 16 Tie wire 40.8 kgs 90 3,672.00
B.5 CONCRETE Ready-mix concrete (6000 psi)
Beam 369 cu.m 6000 2,214,000.00
column 25.7 cu.m 6000 154,200.00
Slab 47.25 cu.m 6000 283,500.00
TOTAL 4,767,522.00
P a g e |200
C.1 Second to Third level
Reinforcement
sSTUDIES Column 1
# 16 Tie wire 28.2 kgs 90 2,538.00
Column 2
# 16 Tie wire 9.4 kgs 90 846.00
C.2 Slab
slab 1
# 16 Tie wire 42 kgs 90 3,780.00
slab 2
# 16 Tie wire 14 kgs 90 1,260.00
C.3 Beam
beam 1
# 16 Tie wire 40.8 kgs 90 3,672.00
Beam 2
# 16 Tie wire 40.8 kgs 90 3,672.00
C.4 CONCRETE Ready-mix concrete (6000 psi)
Beam 369 cu.m 6000 2,214,000.00
column 25.7 cu.m 6000 154,200.00
Slab 47.25 cu.m 6000 283,500.00
TOTAL 4,050,255.00
D.1 Third to Fourth level

Reinforcement
Column 1
# 16 Tie wire 28.2 kgs 90 2,538.00
Column 2
# 16 Tie wire 9.4 kgs 90 846.00
D.2 Slab
slab 1
# 16 Tie wire 42 kgs 90 3,780.00
slab 2
# 16 Tie wire 14 kgs 90 1,260.00
D.3 Beam
beam 1
# 16 Tie wire 40.8 kgs 90 3,672.00
Beam 2
# 16 Tie wire 40.8 kgs 90 3,672.00
D.4 CONCRETE Ready-mix concrete (6000 psi)
Beam 369 cu.m 6000 2,214,000.00
column 25.7 cu.m 6000 154,200.00
Slab 47.25 cu.m 6000 283,500.00
TOTAL 4,050,255.00
E.1 Fourth level to Roof deck

Reinforcement
Column
# 16 Tie wire 37.5 kgs 90 3,375.00
E.2 Slab for fourth level
slab 1
# 16 Tie wire 40.8 kgs 90 3,672.00
Beam 2
# 16 Tie wire 40.8 kgs 90 3,672.00
C.4 CONCRETE Ready-mix concrete (6000 psi)
Beam 369 cu.m 6000 2,214,000.00
column 25.7 cu.m 6000 154,200.00
Slab 47.25 cu.m 6000 283,500.00 P a g e |201
BAGUIO CENTRAL UNIVERSITY – UNDERGRAD STUDIES TOTAL 4,050,255.00
D.1 Third to Fourth level

sSTUDIES Reinforcement
Column 1
# 16 Tie wire 28.2 kgs 90 2,538.00
Column 2
# 16 Tie wire 9.4 kgs 90 846.00
D.2 Slab
slab 1
# 16 Tie wire 42 kgs 90 3,780.00
slab 2
# 16 Tie wire 14 kgs 90 1,260.00
D.3 Beam
beam 1
# 16 Tie wire 40.8 kgs 90 3,672.00
Beam 2
# 16 Tie wire 40.8 kgs 90 3,672.00
D.4 CONCRETE Ready-mix concrete (6000 psi)
Beam 369 cu.m 6000 2,214,000.00
column 25.7 cu.m 6000 154,200.00
Slab 47.25 cu.m 6000 283,500.00
TOTAL 4,050,255.00
E.1 Fourth level to Roof deck

Reinforcement
Column
# 16 Tie wire 37.5 kgs 90 3,375.00
E.2 Slab for fourth level
slab 1
# 16 Tie wire 42 kgs 90 3,780.00
slab 2
# 16 Tie wire 14 kgs 90 1,260.00
Slab for roof deck
slab 1
# 16 Tie wire 42 kgs 90 3,780.00
slab 2
# 16 Tie wire 14 kgs 90 1,260.00
E.3 beam
# 16 Tie wire 47.2 kgs 90 4,248.00
E.4 CONCRETE Ready-mix concrete (6000 psi)
Beam 0.56 cu.m 6000 3,360.00
column 11.02 cu.m 6000 66,120.00
Slab 47.25 cu.m 6000 283,500.00
TOTAL 1,419,187.00
TOTAL COST 16,092,715.00
P a g e |202
CURRICULUM VITAE
sSTUDIES
Ballog, Jinelyn w.
Contact Details
Danac East, Boliney, Abra, Philippines
CP #: +639487461036
E-Mail Address: jhenballog@gmail.com
OBJECTIVE
Seeking for a position where I can develop and enhance my knowledge,
skills and abilities.
QUALIFICATION
• Able to handle work under pressure
• Flexible
• Hardworking
SKILLS
• Basic Autocad
• Basic Sketchup
• Microsoft Office Software (PowerPoint, Word, Excel, Publisher)
• Basic Staad
• Basic RCDC
TRAINING, WEBINARS, SEMINARS ATTENDED
October 30, 2021 User Interface PH 2021A National Forum
on Advanced Engineering Software for
Infrastructure and Technology
Conducted by: Civil Engineering Executive

Organization, College of Engineering and
Agro – industrial Technology, University of
the Philippines Los Baños
EDUCATIONAL BACKGROUND
Baguio Central University
#18 Bonifacio Street, Baguio City, 2600, Philippines
A.Y 2019 – PRESENT
Abra State Institute of Sciences and Technology.

Information and Communication Technology (ICT)
Lagangilang, Abra 2802, Philippines
A.Y 2017 – 2019
P a g e |203
Our Lady of Lourdes High School of Manabo, Abra, Inc.
sSTUDIES
Junior High School
Manabo, Abra, 2810, Philippines
A.Y 2013 – 2017
Danac, Elementary School

Elementary School
Danac west, Boliney, Abra, 2815, Philippines
A.Y 2008 – 2013
PERSONAL INFORMATION
Gender : Female
Birth Date : June 10, 2001
Birth Place : Boliney, Abra
Age : 22
Civil Status : Single
Nationality : Filipino
Religion : Christian
Height : 5’1”
Weight : 45
Language/Dialect : Itneg, Tagalog, English, Ilokano,
Father’s Name : Aliscad I. Ballog
Mother’s Name : Norma w. Ballog
To the best of my knowledge, I certify that the above information is true and accurate.
_________________________
Signature
P a g e |204
sSTUDIES
Belagan L. Roderick
Contact Details
Ambiong Riverside, La Trinidad, Benguet, Philippines
CP #: +639098119939
E-Mail Address: roderickb@gmail.com
OBJECTIVE
To leverage my strong analytical skills and research experience to contribute
valuable insights and solutions, while continuously expanding my knowledge
and expertise in research methodologies and data analysis.
QUALIFICATION
• Flexible
• Hardworking
SKILLS
• Basic Autocad
• Basic Sketchup
• Basic Staad
• Basic RCDC
October 30, 2021 User Interface PH 2021A National Forum on
Advanced Engineering Software for
Infrastructure and Technology

Organization, College of Engineering and Agro –
industrial Technology, University of the
Philippines Los Baños
PCNHS pinsao annex

High School
Pinsao, Baguio city, 2600, Philippines
A.Y 2008-2012
P a g e |205
sSTUDIES
Pinsao, Elementary School
Elementary School
Pinsao, Baguio city, 2600, Philippines
A.Y 2002-2008
Gender : Male
Birth Date : May 23, 1994
Birth Place : BEGH, KM5, La Trinidad, Benguet
Age : 29
Height : 5’1”
Weight : 45
Language/Dialect : Ilocano, Tagalog, English, Ilokano,
Father’s Name : Roberto Belagan
Mother’s Name : Marlyn Belagan
_________________________
Signature
P a g e |206
sSTUDIES
Martin Y. Ignacio
Contact Details
Sabangan, Mt. Province, Philippines
CP #: +6394839933092
E-Mail Address: arjiezedz10@gmail.com
OBJECTIVE
Dedicated and passionate educator seeking to inspire and
empower students to reach their full potential in [subject area]. With a
commitment to fostering an engaging and supportive learning environment, I
aim to cultivate critical thinking skills and a lifelong love for learning in my
students.
QUALIFICATION
• Flexible
• Hardworking
SKILLS
• Basic Autocad
• Basic Sketchup
• Basic Staad
• Basic RCDC
October 30, 2021 User Interface PH 2021A National Forum on
Advanced Engineering Software for Infrastructure
and Technology

Organization, College of Engineering and Agro –
industrial Technology, University of the Philippines
Los Baños
Pingad Natioanal High School

Camatagan, Sabangan,Mt.Province, Philippines
A.Y 2010-2014
P a g e |207
sSTUDIES
Bun-ayan Elementary School
Bun- ayan, Sabangan, Mt. Province, Philippines
A.Y 2004-2010
Gender : Male
Birth Date : September 30, 1997
Birth Place : Bun-ayan, Sabangan, Mountain Province
Age : 26
Height : 5’7”
Weight : 65
Father’s Name : Ignacio Martin
Mother’s Name : Magdalena Martin
_________________________
Signature
P a g e |208
sSTUDIES
Payadkeo d. Jude
Contact Details
Mankayan, Beguet, Philippines
CP #: +639954202431
E-Mail Address: Judedpayadkeo@gmail.com
OBJECTIVE
Creative and strategic marketer with a track record of driving brand awareness
and customer engagement. Passionate about leveraging digital marketing tools
and consumer insights to develop impactful campaigns and drive business
growth. Seeking a dynamic role where I can continue to innovate and deliver
measurable results.
QUALIFICATION
• Flexible
• Hardworking
SKILLS
• Basic Autocad
• Basic Sketchup
• Basic Staad
• Basic RCDC
October 30, 2021 User Interface PH 2021A National Forum on Advanced
Engineering Software for Infrastructure and Technology
Conducted by: Civil Engineering Executive Organization,

College of Engineering and Agro – industrial Technology,
University of the Philippines Los Baños
Mankayan, National Highschool

Mankayan,Benguet, Philippines
A.Y 2010-2014
P a g e |209
sSTUDIES
Mankayan Central School
Mankayan, Benguet, Philippines
A.Y 2004-2010
Gender : Male
Birth Date : June 20, 1997
Age : 26
Height : 5’10”
Weight : 60
Father’s Name : Frigo Payadkeo
Mother’s Name : Mercedez Payadkeo
_________________________
Signature
P a g e |210
sSTUDIES
Sagayo S. Lenny
Contact Details
DELLES, BUGOS LA UNION, Philippines
CP #: +639266322187
E-Mail Address: sagayolenzky@gmail.com
OBJECTIVE
Results-driven engineer with a focus on innovative solutions and efficient
project management. Seeking an opportunity to apply my technical expertise
and problem-solving abilities to contribute to the development and
implementation of cutting-edge engineering solutions
QUALIFICATION
• Flexible
• Hardworking
SKILLS
• Basic Autocad
• Basic Sketchup
• Basic Staad
• Basic RCDC
October 30, 2021 User Interface PH 2021A National Forum on Advanced
Engineering Software for Infrastructure and Technology
Conducted by: Civil Engineering Executive Organization,

College of Engineering and Agro – industrial Technology,
University of the Philippines Los Baños
DELLES ELEMENTARY SCHOOL

DELLES, BUGOS LAUNION, Philippines
A.Y 2006-2011
P a g e |211
sSTUDIES
UPPER TUMAPOC NATIONAL HIGHSCHOOL
DELLES, BUGOS LAUNION, Philippines
A.Y 2013-2019
Gender : Female
Birth Date : September 26, 2001
Age : 21
Height : 5’1”
Weight : 49
Father’s Name : Bonie Sagayo
Mother’s Name : Vicky Sagayo
_________________________
Signature

REVISEDD

Uploaded by

Document Informationclick to expand document informationCivil Engineering

Document Informationclick to expand document information

Copyright:

Available Formats

REVISEDD

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

REVISEDD

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

P a g e |i

BAGUIO CENTRAL UNIVERSITY – UNDERGRAD STUDIES

SCHOOL BUILDING AT VIRAC INTEGRATED SCHOOL,

Presented to the Faculty of the College of Engineering

BAGUIO CENTRAL UNIVERSITY

of the Requirements for the Degree of

Bachelor of Science in Civil Engineering

STOREY SCHOOL BUILDING AT VIRAC INTEGRATED SCHOOL, ITOGON,

BENGUET” prepared and submitted by JINELYN W. BALLOG, RODERICK L.

BELAGAN, IGNACIO Y. MARTIN, JUDE D. PAYADKEO, LENNY S. SAGAYO in

partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of BACHELOR OF SCIENCE

ENGR. ONOFRE F. RILLERA, MSCE

Acceptance and approved by the CE PROJET RESEARCH COMMITTEE

ENGR. ONOFRE F. RILLERA, MSCE

ENGR.CRISELDA S. FELIX, PhD ENGR.CHARLIE M. FELIX, MPA

Name of Institution : BAGUIO CENTRAL UNIVERSITY

Address : #18 Bonifacio Street Baguio City

Title : “STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS AND DESIGNOF A

PROPOSED FOUR-STOREY SCHOOL BUILDING AT

VIRAC INTEGRATED SCHOOL IN ITOGON BENGUET”

Researchers :JINELYN W. BALLOG

Adviser : ENGR. ONOFRE F. RILLERA, MSCE

This research presents a comprehensive structural analysis of a proposed

four-storey school building located at Virac Integrated School in Itogon, Benguet.

environmental conditions. The analysis incorporates modern engineering

principles, considering factors such as seismic activity prevalent in the region.

The methodology involves a detailed examination of architectural and structural

drawings, material properties, and construction techniques. Finite Element

Analysis (FEA) software is employed to simulate and evaluate the structural

of the proposed design, identifying potential areas for optimization or

geographical context. Recommendations for design improvements or

modifications are provided to enhance the overall structural robustness. This

research contributes valuable insights to the field of structural engineering,

particularly in the context of educational infrastructure. The outcomes of this

serve as a reference for future projects in seismic-prone regions.

Keywords: Building, Design, Preliminary, Slab, Seismic, Beam, Column, Footing,

School, NSCP, Dep-Ed, Classroom, and Design Detailing.

protection, inspiration, and blessings throughout our project research to be

necessary facilities to help the students to conduct project research.

The researchers are extremely grateful to our instructors of the College of

courses that help us establish the foundation to pursue this research.

The researchers highly appreciate the invaluable assistance of their

adviser, Engr. Onofre F. Riller, MSCE for his unending support.

To the panel of Examiners: chaired by Engr. Onofre F. Rillera and Engr.

seems to be an uphill task.

We extend our sincere appreciation to the staff and students of Virac

played a pivotal role in the successful completion of this research

experience at Baguio Central University library.

To my beloved parents, who have been my source of inspiration and gave

emotional, and financial support.

To my brothers, sisters, relatives, mentor, friends, and classmates who

shared their words of advice and encouragement to finish this study.

healthy life. All of these, we offer to you.

Conceptual and Theoretical Framework 20

CURRICULUM VITAE 2024

1 Paradigm of the Study 22

5 Slab 2 at roofdeck 112

6 Slab 1 at Fourth Floor 119